Eighth to the Sixteenth Century - Rashid Islamic Center

LJThe Making of Islamic Science is an in-depth explorationof the relationship between Islam and science from theemergence of the Islamic scientific tradition in the eighthcentury to the present time. Conceived as a dynamicrelationship affecting some of the most fundamentalaspects of science in Islamic civilization, the authoridentifies three distinct phases of the relationship betweenIslam the religion and the enterprise of science. The firstphase began with the emergence of science in the Islamiccivilization in the eighth century and ended with the riseof modern science in the West; the second phase beganwith the arrival of modern science in the Muslim worldin the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries at atime when most of the Muslim world was under colonialoccupation; and the third phase, which began around1950 and continues, is described as a more matureapproach to the major questions that modern scienceposes for Islam as it does for all religious traditions.Based on primary sources, the book presents a panoramaof Islamic views on some of the major issues in the currentscience and religion discourse. Written in accessiblelanguage, The Making of Islamic Science is an authenticaccount of the multi-faceted and complex issues that ariseat the interface of the Islamic intellectual tradition andscientific enquiry. Rich in historical details, with a sectiondevoted to extracts from primary sources, the book isa fascinating exploration of the relationship betweenfundamental Islamic beliefs and scientific investigationof the natural world.

Also by Muzaffar IqbalIslam and ScienceGod, Life, and the Cosmos:Christian and Muslim Perspectives (co-ed)Science and IslamDefinitive Encounters: Islam, Muslims, and the WestDew on Sunburnt Roses and other Quantum NotesColours of Loneliness (ed)DiwĀn al-ČallĀj (Arabic-Urdu)InkhilĀĂ (Urdu)InqtĀĂ (Urdu)Dawn in Madinah: A Pilgrim’s PassageThe Occident in an Islamic Mirror (Forthcoming)

The Making ofIslamic ScienceMuzaffar Iqbal

Copyright © 2009 by Muzaffar IqbalAll rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means,electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise withoutthe prior permission of the publisher. The author has asserted his moralrights under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act to be identified asthe author of this work.First published 2007Greenwood PressWestport, Connecticut, London.This edition with Afterword 2009Islamic Book Trust607 Mutiara MajesticJalan Othman46000 Petaling JayaSelangor, Malaysiawww.ibtbooks.comIslamic Book Trust is affiliated to The Other Press.Printed byVinlin Press Sdn Bhd2, Jalan Meranti Permai 1Meranti Permai Industrial Park47100 Puchong, SelangorUnless otherwise indicated, Al-Qalam Publishing (Canada) has thecopyright of all images and illustrations in the text of this book.

ContentsPrefaceChronology of Eventsviixvii1 Introduction 12 Aspects of Islamic Scientific Tradition 11(Eighth to the Sixteenth Centuries)3 Facets of the Islam and Science Relationship 33(Eighth to the Sixteenth Century)4 The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market 69(Eighth to the Sixteenth Century)5 Islam, Transmission, and the Decline of Islamic Science 1216 Islam and Modern Science: The Colonial Era (1800–1950) 1537 Islam and Modern Science: Contemporary Issues 189Afterword: Is Islamic Science Possible? 227Primary Sources 235Annotated Bibliography 265Index 283

PrefaceThis book tells the story of the making of the Islamic scientifictradition and its relationship with Islam, the religion thatgave birth to a unique civilization based on the QurāĀnic worldview.This story can be told from a variety of perspectives ranging fromthe sociological to the historical and from the metaphysical to thescientific. The methodology used for this narrative depends, to alarge extent, on how one perceives the relationship between Islamand science. This question of perspective and methodology hasbecome important in recent years, because the enormous amount oftheoretical work published by scholars working in the field of scienceand Christianity has established a certain model for exploring issuesrelated to the interaction between science and religion, and thismodel seems to have gained general acceptability. In this model,which can be called the “two-entity model,” science and religion aretaken as two separate entities. These two entities are then positedagainst each other and are allowed a variety of possible modes ofinteraction, such as “conflict,” “independence,” “dialogue,” and“integration” (Barbour 2000). This variety, however, is within thetwo-entity model; in other words, these ways of explaining therelationship between science and religion all assume that “science”and “religion” are two separate entities that have a finite number ofpossible modes of interaction. Each of these modes can be furthersubdivided into various possibilities, refined, classified, and gradedin terms of the degree of interaction being strong or weak, but the

viii • The Making of Islamic Sciencemodel itself remains anchored in the foundational paradigm thatconsiders religion and science as two separate and distinct entities.The two-entity model has evolved from a specific cultural,historical, and scientific background, and it is supported by episodesfrom the history of interaction between science and Christianity inthe Western world. It is, however, now being claimed that this modelis universal, and can be used to understand the relationship betweenall scientific traditions and all religions (Barbour 2002). While thismodel has been criticized for certain shortcomings, this criticism hasfor the most part itself remained within the two-entity framework(Cantor and Kenny 2001).Since science, as we understand it today, is generally takento be the large scale, organized activity whose roots go back to theEuropean Scientific Revolution of the seventeenth century, andsince this particular scientific tradition has had a series of conflictswith Christianity, the “conflict model” has gained credibility bothin the scholarly world as well as in the popular mind. Furthermore,since the science begotten by the European Scientific Revolutionhas now spread to all corners of the world, the particular historyof the interaction of science and the religion also seems to haveaccompanied this spread of science: the only adjustment deemednecessary is the substitution of Christianity with Islam or otherreligions of the world.This model is also being applied retrospectively. Thus, thestandard narrative about Islam and science seeks instances ofconflict or cooperation between Islam the religion and the scientifictradition that emerged in the Islamic civilization. This approachmakes no distinction between premodern and modern science asfar as their philosophical foundations are concerned, despite certainfundamental differences between the worldviews that gave birth tothe two scientific traditions.Given this background, we must first ask a basic question: is thetwo-entity model—arising out of a particular cultural, historical,and scientific background—truly applicable to all religions andall scientific traditions? The answer is rather obvious. This modelcan only be applicable to all religious and scientific traditions if, (i)nature—the subject matter of science—and its relationship with

Preface • ixGod and humanity is understood in the same way in all religioustraditions; (ii) the foundational source texts of all religions areparallel to the Bible in the epistemological, metaphysical, andsemantic structures they imply; and (iii) science in all civilizationsis an enterprise that has remained the same over centuries as to itsfoundations.In fact, neither nature nor science nor their mutual relationshipsare conceived uniformly across religious traditions or even withina single tradition over centuries. The two-entity model becomesespecially problematic when we take into account developments inthe history of philosophy of science. Most philosophers of scienceagree that what we now term science is not a label that can be evenlyapplied to the investigation of nature in all eras and all civilizations:that is, the term science (however one defines it) rests upon a numberof conceptual presuppositions peculiar to the social, cultural, andhistorical ethos of each civilization.As mentioned earlier, what is known as science today is generallyunderstood to be the enterprise begun in the seventeenth century,built on the spectacular experiments and theories of Galileo(1564–1642), Kepler (1571–1630), and Newton (1642–1727), andlater entrenched in the social, economic, academic, and culturalinstitutions of the Western civilization. In fact, the emergence of thisparticular scientific tradition has changed the very concept of scienceas it existed prior to the seventeenth century. Many contemporaryhistorians of science tend to use a different term for the scientificactivity prior to the emergence of the seventeenth century and datingback two thousand years. This term is “Natural Philosophy” ratherthan science.The particular history of the relationship between modernscience and Christianity is especially inapplicable to Islam, sincethere is no church in Islam, no ecclesiastic authority that could haveentered into interaction with scientists and scientific institutions inany formal form. There is no Pope who could have established the“Holy Office of the Inquisition,” as Pope Paul III did in 1542, orwho could have issued an Index of Prohibited Books or encyclics onIslam and science. This is not to say that Islamic religious thought iswithout its own internal conflicts—and there will be much mention

x • The Making of Islamic Scienceof these in the subsequent chapters—but to underscore the reasonswhy the two-entity model, often used to describe the interaction ofChristianity and science, is inapplicable to Islam (and possibly otherreligious traditions).One of the most instructive aspects of Islamic tradition is thatthere is no known scientist or religious scholar between the eighthand seventeenth centuries who felt the need to explicitly describethe relationship between Islam and science by writing a bookon the subject. This absence of “Islam and science” discourse as adifferentiated discipline is proof in itself that during these longcenturies—when the Islamic scientific tradition was the world’s mostadvanced enterprise of science—no one felt the need to relate thetwo through some external construct. When the need did arise, itarose in an entirely different context and in an entirely differentera—that is, with the arrival of modern science in the traditionalIslamic lands during the era when almost the entire Muslim worldhad been colonized.Islam does not view nature as a self-subsisting entity thatcan be studied in isolation from its all-embracing view of God,humanity, and the cosmological setting in which human historyis unfolding. Furthermore, in Islamic classification of knowledge,science—the discipline that studies nature—is taken as but onebranch of knowledge, integrally connected with all other branchesof knowledge, all of which are linked to the concept of Tawhid, theOneness of God. Thus, the Islamic tradition does not regard anydiscipline of knowledge independent of other disciplines. For thisreason, the connector “and” in the phrase “Islam and science” doesnot attempt to connect two separate entities, rather, it is used here asa copula.Furthermore, there is a fundamental difference between thenature of science that existed in Islamic civilization between theeighth and sixteenth centuries and modern science; they approachnature in two very different manners and hence one cannot usethe same methodology for narrating the stories of the interactionof Islam with both premodern and modern science. This divisionis not arbitrary but is borne out of a historical necessity: Islamicscientific tradition emerged from within the greater matrix of Islamic

Preface • xicivilization and it interacted with other disciplines and branchesof knowledge in an organic, harmonious manner. The ways of itsinteraction did not exist in vacuum; they existed within the largerintellectual universe of Islam—a universe that had its share of sharpedges and discordant voices, but which was, nonetheless, a universeshaped by the QurāĀnic worldview.With the arrival of modern Western science in the Muslim world,Islam and science discourse entered a new period. Because thisarrival coincided with the colonization of the Muslim world it wasaccompanied by numerous other factors, including the economic,political, and military agendas of the colonizing powers. Thisdestroyed the institutions that had produced the eight-hundred-yearoldIslamic educational tradition. The strangulation of centuries-oldinstitutions and the implantation of new scientific institutions withagendas that suited the interests of the colonizing powers changed thedynamics of the practice of science in the Muslim world. Now Islamhad to interact with a science based on a philosophy of nature foreignto its own conception. In order to explain this new relationship we willhave to take into consideration certain foundational epistemologicalassumptions of modern science, as well as developments that led tothe emergence of these new concepts of nature in the post-BaconianWestern world, and see how these radical changes shaped thediscourse on Islam and science. Also important for our purpose isthe complex process of intellectual colonization of the Muslim mind,which produced a deep-seated inferiority complex with respect toWestern science and technology—the factors perceived as the mainreasons for the West’s domination of the world and the colonization ofMuslim lands.Finally the book discusses the post–World War II era, which hasproduced a certain degree of clarity in the discourse on Islam andscience—a clarity that promises to open new vistas in the future.The current fervor of intellectual activity in the Muslim world—asit reshapes and reconfigures in a world largely constructed byWestern science and technology—is accompanied by a tremendousamount of intellectual and physical violence and chaos, but suchataxic disorder is not new to the Islamic tradition. There have beenseveral such periods in history when Muslims were forced to reshape

xii • The Making of Islamic Sciencetheir intellectual tradition, physical borders, and their relationshipswith other communities and traditions. Some of these periods wereparticularly stark and accompanied by much bloodshed, othersproduced intellectual displacements, but, throughout the lastfourteen hundred years, the Islamic tradition has remained resilientand has been able to cope with apparently insurmountable obstacles.Whether it was the intellectual encounter with the legacy of Greekphilosophy and science—an encounter we will discuss in detail inthe next chapter—or the large-scale physical destruction caused bymarauding tribes sweeping down from the steppes of Central Asia,Islamic tradition was always able to reemerge with renewed vigor.The current Islam and science discourse needs to be viewed inthe larger context of the encounter of Islam with modernity and itsintellectual, social, cultural, political, and economic outlooks, andso the last part of our story has to be narrated within this broadersetting. Of course, it remains to be seen how Islamic tradition will farein this new encounter, as this is a situation of another kind; modernscience and technology are rapidly reshaping the entire spectrum ofhuman existence—from the way human beings are born to the waythey procure their food, travel, communicate, establish interpersonalrelationships, and die. To be sure, it is a fascinating story whichdeserves full attention, as the world around us reshapes throughencounters of a kind never before witnessed in human history.The questions explored in the following chapters include thefollowing:1.What was Islamic in Islamic science?2.3.4.5.How did Islam affect the course of development of the Islamicscientific tradition?Were there any tensions within the Islamic tradition that mayhave inhibited the full blossoming of this scientific activity?What were the distinct contributions of the Islamic scientifictradition to broader scientific knowledge?When, why, and how did this tradition come to an end? How wasthis scientific knowledge passed on to Europe?

xiv • The Making of Islamic Sciencetop of the letter to distinguish two similar sounding letters (e.g., “š” todistinguish “šâd” from “sîn”).The names of many Muslim scientists and scholars of premoderntimes have been corrupted for various reasons, a tradition stemmingfrom medieval translations. Al-Ghazali, for instance, became Algazel;Abu Ma’shar became Albumasar; Ibn Tufayl became Abubacer;al-Bitruji became Alpetragius; Al-Farghani became Alfraganus;Razi became Rhazes; Abu’l-Qasim al-Zahrani became Albucasis;and Ibn Sina became Avicenna. Unfortunately, this practice, whichfirst emerged at a time when Arabic names were either carelesslyLatinized or were simply distorted because of a lack of properlinguistic skills, continues in many works that do not use accuratetransliteration schemes. For reasons of expediency, this book alsodoes not use a transliteration system for Arabic words, but it doespreserve original names.Arabic names can be confusing for readers unfamiliar with thissystem. Many names cited in this book are not really the personalnames (such as Muhammad, Husayn, or Ali) of the scientist or scholarbecause in most cases they are known through family associations(as in “ibn Sina,” the son of Sina) or simply by alluding to theirtribe, place, or region of birth (as in “al-Khwarizmi,” meaning “ofor from Khwarzam”). Sometimes a person is known by his paternalname, kunya (Abu Hamid, “the father of Hamid”). A nickname, anoccupational name, or a title can also become the most well knownname of a person (al-Jahiz, “the goggle-eyed”; al-Khayyam, “the tentmaker”). In this book, the full name is given at first use and the mostwell known name is used thereafter.Another point of import is the pronoun used for the writer. InIslamic tradition, the plural first-person “we” rather than “I” ispreferred, for a variety of reasons. “I” is considered impolite becauseof the emphasis this pronoun has on the individual, whereas “we”takes the emphasis away from the single person—the additionalpersona is left ambiguous, but it is assumed that the writer is notalone in the process of writing; that he or she is being aided by others;that the Divine presence is there in the very act of transmission ofknowledge and ideas; that a whole host of scholars are in company.

Preface • xvFor these and other reasons we seldom find the use of “I” in Islamicscholarly tradition, and this book follows precedent.For reasons of simplicity, only one system of dates is used. Unlessspecified, all dates refer to Common Era. Dates of birth or death arementioned when a person’s name first appears in the text; “ca.” isused to indicate approximate date.z

Chronology of EventsSixth Century570–632 Prophet Muhammad, born in Makkah, died in MadinahSeventh Century610 Muslims migrated from Makkah to Madinah (This markedthe beginning of the Hijri calendar.)632–655 Muslim conquests of Syria, Iraq, and Egypt661 Establishment of Umayyad dynasty691 Dome of the Rock built in JerusalemEighth Century706 Great Mosque of the Umayyads built in Damascus710 Muslim forces entered Spain712 Muslims reached Samarqandal-Asmai (739–831) the first Muslim scientist known tocontribute to zoology, botany, and animal husbandry750 Establishment of the Abbasid dynasty; end of the Umayyaddynastyxvii

xviii • The Making of Islamic Science754–775 The reign of caliph al-Mansur, patron of early translationsof scientific texts from Greek762 Baghdad founded by AbbasidsAmr ibn Bakr al-Jahiz (779–868) zoologist, lexicographer785 Mosque of Cordoba begun796 First university in al-Andalus (Spain)Jabir ibn Hayyan (ca. late 8 th and early 9 th centuries) “fatherof alchemy” who emphasized scientific experimentation andleft an extensive corpus of alchemical and scientific worksNinth Centuryca. 800Teaching hospital established in BaghdadBanu Musa brothers (ca. 800–873) supervised thetranslation of Greek scientific works into Arabic, foundedArabic school of mathematics, wrote over twenty bookson subjects such as astronomy, ingenious devices, on themeasurement of plane and spherical figuresIbn Ishaq al-Kindi (801–873) philosopher, mathematician,specialist in physics, optics, medicine, metallurgyHunayn ibn Ishaq (809–873) collected and translatedGreek scientific and medical knowledge into ArabicAbbas ibn Firnas (810–887) technologist and chemist, thefirst man in history to make a scientific attempt at flying813–848 Flourishing of Mu‘tazilite philosophical theology832 Establishment of Bayt al-Hikmah library in Baghdad bycaliph al-Ma’munThabit ibn Qurra (835–901) mathematician who worked onnumber theory, astronomy, and staticsAl-Khwarizmi (b. before 800, d. after 847) mathematician,geographer, and astronomer, the founder of algebraca. 850Arabic treatises written on the astrolabeAl-Battani (850–922) astronomer who determined the solaryear as being 365 days, 5 hours, 46 minutes, 24 seconds

Chronology of Events • xixAbu Kamil (859–930) mathematician who applied algebraicmethods to geometric problemsAl-Farghani (d. after 861) astronomer, civil engineer whosupervised construction of the Great Nilometer canal ofCairoSabur ibn Sahl (d. 868) pharmacistAl-Tabari (b. ca. 808 and d. ca. 861) physician, naturalscientist who wrote on medicine, embryology, surgery,toxicology, psychotherapy, and cosmogonyAbbas ibn Firnas (d. 888) studied mechanics of flight,developed artificial crystals, built a planetariumTenth Century874–999 Samanid dynasty in TransoxaniaIshaq ibn Hunayn (d. 910) physician and scientifictranslator from Greek and Syriac to ArabicAbdul Ibn Khuradadhbih (d. 912) geographer whodeveloped a full map of trade routes of the Muslim worldAbu Bakr Zakaria al-Razi (b. ca. 854–d. 925 or 935)philosopher and physician with specialty in ophthalmology,smallpox, and chemistryAl-Battani (b. before 858–d. 929) mathematician oftrigonometry and astronomerAl-Farabi (b. ca. 870–d. 950) metaphysician, musicologist,philosopher of sociology, logic, political science, and musicAl-Sufi (903–986) astronomer renowned for hisobservations and descriptions of fixed starsIbrahim ibn Sinan (908–946) mathematician andastronomer, who studied geometry, particularly tangentsto circles, also advanced theory of integration, apparentmotions of the sun, optical study of shadows, solar hours,and astrolabes931 Baghdad initiated a licensing examination for physicians,attended by 869 doctors

xx • The Making of Islamic ScienceAl-Zahrawi (936–1013) “father of surgery,” wrote a thirtyvolumework of medical practiceAl-Buzjani (940–998) astronomer and mathematician whospecialized in trigonometry and geometry936 Madinat al-Zahra palace complex built in CordobaAl-Ash’ari (d. 936) founder of school of Islamic theologyIbn Yunus (950–1009) astronomer known for his manytrigonometrical and astronomical tablesAbu Hasan Ali al-Masudi (d. 956 or 957) geographerand historian who conceived of geography as an essentialprerequisite of historyAl-Khazin (d. 971) astronomer and mathematician, whoseZij al-safa’ih (Tables of the Disks of the Astrolabe) were thebest in his fieldAl-Khujandi (d. 1000) mathematician and astronomer whodiscovered the sine theorem relative to spherical trianglesIbn al-Haytham (965–1040) astronomer, mathematician,optician, and physicist973 Al-Azhar University founded in CairoAl-Baghdadi (980–1037) mathematician, wrote about thedifferent systems of arithmeticAl-Jayyani (989–1079) mathematician, wrote commentarieson Euclid’s Elements and the first treatise on sphericaltrigonometry969–1171 Fatimid dynasty in EgyptEleventh CenturyAl-Baqilani (d. 1013) theologian who introduced theconcepts of atoms and vacuum into the Kalam, extendingatomism to time and motion, conceiving them as essentiallydiscontinuousIbn al-Thahabi (d. 1033) physician, who wrote the firstknown alphabetical encyclopedia of medicine with lists of

Chronology of Events • xxithe names of diseases, medicines, the physiological processor treatment, and the function of the human organsAbu Rayhan al-Biruni (973–1048) one of the greatestscientists in history; astronomer and mathematician whodetermined the earth’s circumferenceIbn Sina (980–1037) the greatest physician and philosopherof his time, the author of Canon of MedicineAl-Zarqali (1028–1087) mathematician and astronomer,who excelled at the construction of precision instrumentsfor astronomical use; constructed a flat astrolabe that was“universal” for it could be used at any latitude; built a waterclock capable of determining the hours of the day andnight and indicating the days of the lunar months1085 Christians took ToledoIbn Zuhr (1091–1161) physician, surgeon, most prominentparasitologist of the Middle Ages, the first to test differentmedicines on animals before using them with humans1095 Pope Urban called for Crusade1099 Jerusalem taken by CrusadersTwelfth CenturyOmar Khayyam (1048-1131) mathematician, astronomer,and philosopher, well known in the West for his poetryAbu Hamid al-Ghazali (1058–1111) philosopher andtheologian, the most influential scholar, who remains animportant intellectual figure to this dayIbn al Tilmidh (b. ca. 1073–1165) pharmacist who wrote alAqrabadhinIbn Bajjah (d. ca. 1138) philosopher, scientist, physician,musician, commentator on AristotleAl-Idrisi (1100–1166) geographer and cartographer, whoconstructed a world globe map of 400 kg pure silver,precisely recording on it the seven continents with traderoutes; his work was the best of Arab-Norman scientificcollaboration

xxii • The Making of Islamic ScienceIbn Tufayl (1105–1186) Andalusian physician, author ofHayy bin YaqzanGerard of Cremona (b. ca. 1114–1187) translator of workson science from Arabic to LatinAl-Khazini (b. ca. 1115– d. ca.1130) astronomer, engineer,inventor of scientific instruments, wrote about the scienceof weights and art of constructing balances, renowned forhis hydrostatic balanceIbn Rushd (1126–1198) Andalusian physician, philosopher,judge, astronomer, commentator on Aristotle; the mostpopular Muslim philosopher in the Latin WestAl-Samawal (1130–1180) mathematician, extendedarithmetic operations to handle polynomialsAl-Bitruji (fl. ca. 1190) astronomer, natural philosopher,and mathematicianCrusaders defeated by Salah al-Din Ayyubi (d. 1193)Al-Suhrawardi (d. 1191) one of the greatest mystics of Islamwho integrated philosophical cosmologies with IslamicworldviewThirteenth CenturyIbn al-Baytar (b. ca. 1190–d. 1248) pharmacologist andbotanist who systematized the known animal, vegetable,and mineral medicinesAl-Jazari (fl. ca. 1204) inventor of technologies, wrote TheBook of Knowledge of Ingenious DevicesFahkr al-Din al-Razi (d. 1210) exegete and philosopher,author of the commentary Mafatih al-GhaybAl-Samarqandi (d. 1222) physician who wrote on symptomsand treatment of diseasesIbn Nafis (1213–1288) physician who first described thepulmonary circulation of the blood, whose ComprehensiveBook on the Art of Medicine consisted of 300 volumesIbn Jubayr (d. 1217) philosopher, geographer, and traveler

Chronology of Events • xxiii1219–1329 Mongol raids caused enormous destruction of cities andeconomiesAl-Maghribi (1220–1283) trigonometrist and astronomerChristians took CordobaIbn al-Arabi (d. 1240) exponent of Sufi monism, wroteimportant works on cosmologyAl-Suri (d. 1241) pharmacologist, who documented everyknown medicinal plant1258 Baghdad destroyed by Mongols, ended the AbbasidCaliphate1261 Mamluk dynasty established in EgyptNasir al-Din al-Tusi (1201–1274) astronomer andmathematician who specialized in non-Euclidean geometryAl-Qazwini (b. ca.1203–1283) cosmographer andgeographer1232–1492 Construction of al-Hambra1236 Fall of Cordoba to Christians1244 Crusaders lost Jerusalem for the last time1254–1517 Mamluk rule in Egypt1261 Foundation of the gazi principalities in Western Anatolia,the beginning of the Ottoman Empire1258 Baghdad taken by Mongols1267 First Muslim state of Samudra Pasai in Indonesia1271 Latin empire collapsed; Byzantine rule restored inConstantinopleJalaluddin Rumi (d. 1273) Sufi, the author of MasnaviFourteenth Century1300 Timbuctu, Mali, and Gao became important centers oflearning1300–1453 Growth of Ottoman Empire1303 Mongols defeated by Mamluks in Egypt

xxiv • The Making of Islamic ScienceIbn al-Shatir (1304–1375) Damascene astronomerwho developed the concept of planetary motion andastronomically defined the times of prayerIbn al-Banna (d. 1321)Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (d. 1350)Ibn Battutah (1304–d.1368 or 1377) famed traveler,covered 75,000 miles in 22 years across Europe, Africa,the Middle East, and Asia, made extensive contributions togeography1308–1312 Mali sultans traveled across the Atlantic, explored thelands around the Gulf of Mexico and the American interiorvia the Mississippi Riveral-Khalili (1320–1380) astronomer compiled extensivetables for astronomical useKamaluddin Farsi (d. 1320) astronomer who improved Ibnal-Haytham’s Optics, studied reflection and the rainbowIbn Khaldun (1332–1406) philosopher of history andsociety, wrote a universal history MuqaddimahQutb al-Din Shirazi (1236–1311) astronomer who perfectedPtolemaic planetary theoryca. 1313Golden Horde Mongol khans converted to IslamIzz al Dinn al Jaldaki (d. 1360) chemistUlugh Beg (1394–1449) ruler of Samarqand and anaccomplished astronomer; his astronomical observatorycompleted in 1429Fifteenth CenturyTimur (d. 1405) ruled from the Ganges to theMediterraneanAl-Umawi (1400–1489) mathematician who wrote works onarithmetic and mensurationAl-Qalasida (1412–1486) mathematician who introducedideas of algebraic symbolism by using letters in place ofnumbers

Chronology of Events • xxvGhiyath ud-Din Kashi (d. 1429) astronomer andmathematician who worked at Samarqand Observatory1453 Ottomans took Constantinople1455 Papal Bull authorized Roman Catholics to “reduce toservitude all infidels”1492 Christians took Granada; Muslim states ended in Spain;more than a million volumes of Muslim works on science,philosophy, and culture were burnt in the public square ofVivarrambla in Granada1498 Vasco Da Gama in India with the help of the Arab Muslimnavigator Ahmad Ibn Majid (b. 1432) who wrote theencyclopedic Kitab al-Fawa’id fi Usul ‘Ilm al-Bahr wa’l-Qaw’id (Book of Useful Information on the Principles and Rulesof Navigation)Sixteenth Centuryca. 1500–1700 The height of power of the three post-Abbasid empiresa) Ottoman Empire (1299-1924);b) Safavid Empire (1501 to 1736);c) Mughal Empire (1526-1857)1528 Sankore University founded in TimbuktuSeventeenth Century1602 Dutch East India Company foundedMulla Sadra (d. 1641), the most important Muslimphilosopher of the post-Ibn Sina era, the author of the FourIntellectual Journeys1683 Siege of Vienna by Turks1688 Fall of Belgrade to OttomansEighteenth Century1707 Mughal Emperor Awrangzeb died

xxvi • The Making of Islamic Science1722 Afghans conquered Iran and ended the Safavid dynasty1736 Nadir Shah (d. 1747) assumed the title of Shah of Persiaand founded the Afsharid dynasty, defeated the Mughalsand sacked Delhi 17391757 Battle of Plassey marked the beginning of British rule inIndia1781–1925 Qajar Empire in Iran1789 Napoleon arrived in EgyptHajji Mulla Hadi Sabzwari (b. 1797 or 1798–1873)philosopher, most prominent of Qajar periodNineteenth CenturyMost of the Muslim world colonized by European powersSyed Ahmad Khan (1817-1898) published an incompletescientific commentary (tafsir) on the QurāĀnSayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (1838-1897) Muslim thinkerwho debated with the French philosopher Ernst Renan onreligion and scienceNew scientific institutions modeled on European patternswere established in the colonies; official languages changedto English or French in most of the Muslim world1857 India became a British colony1880 Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Iskandarani, an Egyptianphysician published the first complete scientific tafsir of theQurāĀnTwentieth Century1900-1920 Nationalistic movements emerged in many parts of theMuslim world1920-50 Struggle for independence throughout the Muslim world1950-1965 Decolonization and rapid emergence of new nation statesin the entire Muslim world

Chronology of Events • xxvii1950-1980 Large numbers of Muslim students and emigrants arrivedin the West1975 After the dramatic rise in oil prices, many oil-rich Muslimcountries imported Western science and technology; newscientific institutions emerged in the Muslim world1975-2000 Islam and Science discourse matures. A number of newperspectives emerge1980-2000 Teaching of modern science at post-graduate level wasgiven greater attention and state patronage in certainMuslim countries such as Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia,Iran, Egypt, and Turkey1980-90 Some Muslim countries established institutions for researchon the scientific verses of the QurāĀn, held conferences andpublished books on Islam and science1990-2000 Exponential increase in the number of Muslim websitesdealing with Islam and science1988-2000 Following Gulf War I, many Muslim states made efforts toacquire modern defense technology1998 Pakistan successfully tested a nuclear weaponTwenty-First Century2001 Rapid spread of new technologies and consumer goods,such as cell phones, throughout the Muslim worldFollowing the September 11, 2001 hijacking of Americanplanes, many Western countries imposed restrictions onMuslim students entering certain fields of science andtechnology.Increased Muslim presence on the internet, with morewebsites making claims about the presence of modernscientific theories and facts in the QurāĀn; simultaneousmaturity of Islam and science discourse as more scholarspay attention to the fundamental issues in the discourse

L1JIntroductionIt can be said that the relationship between Islam, the religion,and science has gone through three distinct phases: (i) from thebeginning of Islam to the emergence of modern science; (ii) from thearrival of modern science in the Muslim lands to the middle of thetwentieth century; and (ii) since the middle of the twentieth century.This division is not arbitrary; rather, it arises from the very nature ofthe history of science itself because the enterprise of science has gonethrough a foundational change since the Scientific Revolution.Before we embark on this exploration, something must besaid about Islam itself, for—despite its ubiquitous presence in themedia—it remains one of the most poorly understood religions in theworld. Along with contemporary events contributing to the generalperception of Islam in the West, there is also silent historical baggageunderlying non-Muslim perspectives on the religion, making theunderstanding of Islam a complicated affair. The twentieth centuryitself has seen a phenomenal shift in how Islam is perceived: at itsdawn, Islam was considered by many to have lost its appeal, or,at least, it was a religion without a definable polity, as most of itsadherents then lived in colonies occupied and ruled by Europeanpowers. At the dawn of the twenty-first century, the word Islam hasbecome commonplace and hardly a day passes without mention ofIslam and Muslims in headline news. This enormous attention has,however, not produced an understanding of the religion based onits own sources; extensive journalistic coverage of events has been

2 • The Making of Islamic Scienceresponsible instead for the distortion of the message of Islam. It is,therefore, necessary to begin with a brief account of the emergence ofIslam in the seventh century in Makkah, a remote town in Arabia.The Emergence of IslamMakkah, where Muhammad, the future Prophet of Islam, was born,was not located on the crossroads of any major civilization of thetime. It was nevertheless a town of considerable importance owingto the presence of the Ka‘bah, a Sanctuary built there by Abrahamand his son Ishmael some 2500 years before the birth of Muhammadto Aminah on a Monday in the month of April, 571. Her husband,Abdullah, had died a few months before the birth of the child whilereturning home from Syria, where he had traveled with one of thetrade caravans that left Makkah twice a year—for Yemen in winterand for Syria in summer. Shortly after his birth, the child was takento the Ka‘bah and named Muhammad by his grandfather, AbdulMuttalib, a descendent of Abraham through his son Ishmael.At the age of forty, when Muhammad had been married to awealthy widow of Makkah for almost fifteen years, he received his firstrevelation while in retreat in a cave at the summit of the Mountainof Light, about five kilometers south of the ancient Sanctuary: Recite!Recite in the name of thy Sustainer Who created; Created Man from a clot ofblood; Recite—for thy Sustainer is the Most Bountiful—Who taught by thepen; taught Man what he knew not (Q. 96:1-5). This was the beginningof the descent of the QurāĀn—the Book which is at the heart of allthings Islamic.The revelation continued over the next twenty-three years,culminating a few days before the death of the Prophet in Madinah,an oasis on the caravan route to Syria, some four hundred kilometersnorth of Makkah and to where the Prophet had migrated inSeptember 622. This migration, called the Hijrah, marks thebeginning of the Islamic calendar as well as the establishment of thefirst Islamic state. At the time of the Prophet’s death in June 632 atthe age of sixty-three, this state had expanded to encompass all ofArabia, and an expedition was on its way to Syria, at the northernborder of the nascent state. Within a century of his death, Islam

Introduction • 3had spread throughout the Middle East, much of Africa and Asia,and as far as Narbonne in southern France. This expansion of thegeographical boundaries of the Muslim world occurred in twosuccessive waves. The first took place between 632 and 649 and thesecond between 693 and 720.This rapid expansion of the geographical boundaries ofthe Islamic state has often led Western historians to view Islamas a religion that spread by the sword. This image of Islam wasconstructed during the Middle Ages against the background of theCrusades and has remained entrenched in the West to this day (Grant2004, 231). As far as Muslims are concerned, it was the inherenttruth of the message of Islam, rather than military victories, thatestablished Islam across this vast region, extending from Makkah tosouthern France on the one hand and from the steppes of CentralAsia to the barren deserts of Africa on the other. A serious inquiryinto the rapid spread of Islam during its first century is bound toproduce a different answer than brute force, because it defies bothlogic and historicity that a few Arab armies commanding at most afew thousand soldiers, passing through certain selected routes of theancient world, could bring such a large number of people into the foldof Islam. In any case, more important for the purpose of our bookare two revolutions of another kind: a vast social revolution that tookplace during this first century of Islam, and an intellectual revolutionof the first order that transformed the nomadic Arab society withintwo generations.The Two RevolutionsThe social revolution was catalyzed by the rapid incorporation ofnumerous cultures into the fold of Islam. Within those first hundredyears, a very large number of micro-transformations took place inthe ancient lands of Asia, Africa, and Central Asia to give birth to anew social and cultural mosaic. It is this multicultural, multiethnic,and even multireligious society that was to produce the conditions forthe seven-century-long enterprise of science in Islamic civilization.This vast social change in the eighth century was the result of massconversions, migrations, the establishment of new cities and new

4 • The Making of Islamic Scienceadministrative and fiscal institutions, and a new social contractthat Islam established with Jewish and Christian communities. Thebelief system of Islam was able to incorporate varied social andcultural traditions because of its overarching universal nature.Thus, whether it was the hunting rites of the nomadic tribes ofCentral Asia or the rituals of marriage and death of the ancient citydwellers of Mesopotamia, Islam was able to recast these social andcultural aspects of various peoples through reorienting them to itsuncompromising monotheism, a process that often left the outer formuntouched while removing any trace of polytheism. This allowanceencouraged cultural diversity and produced a vast synthesis ofnumerous cultures over a very large region of the old world.The expansion of geographical borders and the subsequentcultural synthesis forced the keenest minds of the times tocontinuously formulate answers to a wide range of questions arisingfrom, among other things, new theological concerns, specific needsof the newly converted masses and immigrants, and the emergenceof new administrative and financial arrangements between the stateand its citizens. The rapid geographical expansion also posed newquestions related to the practice of faith and that required immediateattention: how to determine the correct qiblah (direction towardthe Ka‘bah in Makkah) for the five obligatory daily prayers from adistant city; how to calculate the correct amount of zakah (obligatorycharity on wealth and material goods) on goods that did not exist inMadinah during the life of the Prophet and for which no clear-cutruling could be found in the QurāĀn or Prophetic precedent; how toapply the principles of inheritance outlined in the QurāĀn to complexsituations that had not existed in the life of the Muslim community inMadinah. These and numerous other issues arising out of a rapidlyexpanding social, political, and economic landscape produced afervor of intellectual activity that resulted in the emergence of newbranches of knowledge.The intellectual revolution that took place in the world of Islam atthis early stage was as much a result of the internal dynamics of theunfolding of Islam in history as it was due to its encounter with someof the richest intellectual traditions of the ancient world. Alreadyduring the life of the Prophet, the sciences of the QurāĀn (Ulum al-

Introduction • 5QurāĀn) had emerged as a differentiated branch of learning. Shortlyafter his death, focused efforts were made to preserve, annotate, andverify the Hadith.The QurāĀn consists of about 70,000 words. Its text has remainedfixed without any dispute throughout its existence. During the lifeof the Prophet, it was memorized by many Companions, some ofwhom also had written codices It was “put between the two covers”shortly after the death of the Prophet (Azami 2003). The Hadith,however, were in the thousands, and only a portion of these sayingsof the Prophet had existed in written form during his lifetime. HisCompanions started to compile these sayings after his death, whichled to the emergence of a rich tradition of Hadith studies, whichin turn called for the development of exacting methodologiesand techniques to authenticate, index, and cross-reference a verylarge number of individual sayings of the Prophet. This collectionactivity, which received sustained and focused attention by successivegenerations of Muslims until about the middle of the third century ofIslam, produced verification methodologies that were later employedby scientists and philosophers in other fields, such as the exactsciences.The QurāĀn and the Sunnah—the combined body of the Prophet’ssayings and his traditions—are the two primary sources of Islam,and both have remained at the heart of Islamic tradition for overfourteen hundred years. For the purpose of this book, it is importantto mention that various branches of learning dealing with these twoprimary sources emerged in Islamic civilization prior to any otherbranch of knowledge, and they influenced all other fields—includingthe natural sciences—in numerous direct and indirect ways. Thus,by the time the study of nature appeared in Islamic civilization asan organized and recognizable enterprise, the religious sciences hadalready been firmly established; this sequence affected the frameworkused to explore nature.The QurāĀn itself lays out a well-defined and comprehensiveconcept of the natural world, and this played a foundational rolein the making of the scientific tradition in Islamic civilization. It istherefore incumbent to briefly mention the QurāĀnic view of nature

6 • The Making of Islamic Sciencein order to develop a methodology for exploring specific aspects ofthe relationship between Islam and science.The QurẖĀn and the Natural WorldAlthough the three Abrahamic monotheistic religions—Judaism,Christianity, and Islam—share a certain degree of commonalityAn illustrated page from a thirteenth-century QurāĀnmanuscript in Thulth and Rayhan scripts. The QurāĀn wasrevealed to Prophet Muhammad over a period of twenty-threeyears (610–632). The QurāĀnic view of nature influenced thedevelopment of science in Islamic civilization.

Introduction • 7with respect to belief in one God and certain aspects of creation,their concepts of the natural world and its relationship to humanityhas considerable divergences (Nasr 1996, 53). In the case of Islam,the QurāĀnic view of nature is characterized by an ontological andmorphological continuity with the very concept of God—a linkagethat imparts a certain degree of sacredness to the world of nature bymaking it a Sign (âya, pl. âyât) pointing to a transcendental reality.However, just as the QurāĀn presents the world of nature to humanityas a sign, it also calls its own verses âyât. This semantic linkage isfurther strengthened through various QurāĀnic descriptions andmodes of communication. God communicates, according to theQurāĀn, by “sending” His âyât. As Izutsu has noted,on this basic level, there is no essential difference betweenlinguistic and nonlinguistic Signs; both types are equallydivine âyât … the meaning of this, in the sense in which theQurāĀn understands it, is that all that we usually call naturalphenomena, such as rain, wind, the structure of the heaven andthe earth, alternation of day and night, the turning about of thewinds, etc., all these would be understood not as simple naturalphenomena, but as so many ‘signs’ or ‘symbols’ pointing to theDivine intervention in human affairs, as evidences of the DivineProvidence, care and wisdom displayed by God for the good ofhuman beings on this earth. (Izutsu 1964, 142–143)Thus science, as a systematic study of nature and as it developedin Islamic civilization, could not treat nature and its study as anentity separate from Islam. Furthermore, the QurāĀn views natureas a vast system pregnant with movement rather than an inertbody. Nature accepts and acts upon Divine Commands, like all elsebetween the heavens and the earth. This view of nature grants itdistinct metaphysical qualities. Rather than being self-subsisting,autonomous, or random, nature is described by the QurāĀn as asophisticated system of interconnected, consistent, uniform, andhighly active entities, all of which are ontologically dependent on theCreator and exalt Him in their own specific ways (Q. 24:41). The sevenheavens and the earth and whatever is between them sing the glories of God,an oft-repeated refrain of the QurāĀn tells us. It must be noted here,however, that this dependence and subservience of nature to God is

8 • The Making of Islamic Sciencenot a haphazard matter, since God’s ways and laws are unchanging(Q. 33:62), and thus the entire world of nature operates throughimmutable laws that can be discovered through the investigation ofnature. Since these laws are both uniform and knowable, and sincenature points to something higher than itself—indeed, to the CreatorHimself—it follows that the study of nature leads to an understandingof God, and is in fact a form of worship.In understanding these relationships drawn by the QurāĀn, it isimportant to recall that the QurāĀn is considered by Muslims to bethe actual speech of God, imparted to the heart of the Prophet bythe Archangel Gabriel. The Prophet then conveyed it as he receivedit. The text of the QurāĀn thus becomes the actual Divine Word, notretrojective inspirational transcriptions, and so its conception of thenatural world is (for the Muslim) grounded in immutable faith.It should also be noted that, according to the QurāĀn,human beings were created by God as His vicegerents (khalifa)in the physical world lying within the finite boundaries of time… [and] the very principle of God’s vicegerency also made themHis servants (‘abd, ‘ibad) who were—by virtue of a PrimordialCovenant (mithaq) they had affirmed, and a Trust (amanah) theyhad taken upon themselves in preeternity—the custodians ofthe entire natural world. Humanity was thus transcendentallycharged not to violate the ‘due measure’ (qadr) and balance(mizan) that God had created in the larger cosmic whole. (Haq2001, 112)The QurāĀnic view of the relationship between the world of natureand God on the one hand and between the world of nature and theprogeny of Adam on the other is thus highly interconnected.Adam’s superiority over other creatures and his regencyover nature arise in a context that is highly complex, withits interdigitating metaphysical, moral, and naturalisticdimensions: the conceptual setting here evidently being verydifferent from that of the Old Testament and the Evangel. (Haq2001, 112)Another aspect of the QurāĀnic view of nature is intimately linkedto the Divine Name al-Rahman, the Most Merciful (one of the twonames of mercy to be found in the basmala, the verse of the QurāĀn

Introduction • 9placed at the head of all but one of its chapters: In the name of Allah,the Most Merciful, the Most Beneficent). It has been frequently notedthat, in the totality of the QurāĀnic teachings, God’s Mercy andHis Omnipotence are inseparable (Haq 2001, 118), and that “thesetwo perfections are the two poles of divine action, at the same timecontrasted and complementary” (Gardet 1987, 30). According to theQurāĀn, the very act of bringing into existence from nonexistence isan act of mercy. Furthermore, the QurāĀnic view of existence not onlyinvolves this first act of mercy but also the idea that the continuousexistence of things is entirely due to their being sustained by God,one of Whose Names is Rabb, the One Who nourishes and sustains.Thus, according to the QurāĀn, not only the act of creation but alsothe act of providing sustenance for the continuation of existence isalso an act of mercy—and, since nature is an expression of God’sMercy, all that it contains is by its sheer bountiful existence anundeniable sign of God’s existence (and Mercy).The theme of Mercy is especially relevant to our subject. In achapter of the QurāĀn entitled al-Rahman, a vast range of phenomenaof the natural world—the sun and the moon, rivers, oceans, fruits,cattle—are mentioned as being so many divine favors and blessings.The QurāĀn then asks, in a powerful refrain occurring thirty-threetimes in this chapter, which of the favors of your Sustainer will you thendeny? In fact, one can say that the whole thrust of the QurāĀnic viewof nature and its relationship with God and humanity is underscoredby three interconnected concepts: Tawhid (Oneness of God) and thevarious associated concepts arising out of the manifestation of divineattributes; the Amr (Command) of God in the operational realm; andthe intertwined presence of Qadr (Measure) and Mizan (Balance) inthe material world (Haq 2001). These three QurāĀnic concepts are notonly central to the teachings of Islam but they are also of immenseimportance for understanding the relationship between Islam andscience. Although Islam, “like Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, andmany other religions, has developed numerous schools of thought[such as] theological, philosophical, scientific, and mystical, dealingwith the order of nature” (Nasr 1996, 60), these three conceptsremain central to all schools of Islamic thought.

Given these inherent relationships between God, humanity,and nature, it is impossible in Islam to conceive of nature asan independent, self-subsisting entity. Likewise, science—asan organized enterprise that studies and explores the naturalworld—cannot be conceived as a separate entity which has to besomehow externally related to Islam. In fact, the much-touted lack ofseparation of state and religion in Islamic polity is applicable to allother domains, as Muslims believe that Islam is not merely a set ofcommandments and rituals but a complete way of life, encompassingall domains of knowledge and human activity. This worldview isbased on an uncompromising insistence on Tawhid, the Oneness ofGod, a ubiquitous concept in Islamic thought that unifies all realmsof knowledge, making them branches of the same tree. Difficult asit may be for the modern Western mind—accustomed to regardingreligion solely as set of personal beliefs—to understand this aspectof Islam, it is impossible to construct a relationship between Islamand science—or any other domain of knowledge—as a relationshipbetween two distinctively separate entities.We need to understand this relationship like that of a motherand a child, in which a particular branch of knowledge—science—emerges from within the greater body of knowledge dealing withthe world of existing things, a world conceived as created by andontologically dependent upon the Creator. It is a relationship that isinherently inseparable from the well-articulated concept of nature asa Divine Sign.The next chapter explores the emergence of science in Islamiccivilization, its relationship with the Greek, Persian, and Indianscientific traditions and its flowering.z

L2JAspects of Islamic Scientific Tradition(Eighth to the Sixteenth Century)The Emergence of Science in Islamic CivilizationOur current knowledge of original sources does not permit us todraw a clear picture of the initial phases of scientific enterprisein Islamic civilization. What can be said with a certain degree ofconfidence pertains to the period beginning with the second halfof the second century of Islam. By then, however, the enterprise ofscience in Islam was already well established, with definable branchesand scientists of high caliber working in disciplines such as cosmology,geography, astronomy, and alchemy. Thus, until we discover newmanuscripts and other primary sources, the story of the emergence ofscience in Islamic civilization has to remain tentatively dated around777, the year in which Jabir bin Hayyan, one of the most accomplishedMuslim scientists of this early period, is said to have died.Despite the paucity of early sources, we can confidently trace twobranches of science—medicine and astronomy—to the days of theProphet himself, because we do have verifiable sources allowing usto recount the story of their emergence in Madinah. Sayings of theProphet dealing with health, sickness, hygiene, and specific diseasesand their cures were compiled and systematized by later generationsof Muslims, and this body of literature provided the foundation fora specific branch of medical science in Islam: al-Tibb al-Nabawi,Prophetic Medicine. Numerous books on Prophetic medicinehave preserved for us not only early accounts of how this branch of

12 • The Making of Islamic Sciencemedicine emerged but also sophisticated theoretical discussions on theentire range of subjects dealing with health and medicine in Islam (al-Jawziyya 1998). Likewise, pre-Islamic Arabic astronomy was radicallytransformed under the influence of QurāĀnic cosmological doctrinesto give birth to characteristically Islamic astronomical literaturegenerally referred to as the radiant cosmology (al-hay’a as-saniya).These early sciences had practical use for the first communityof Muslims living in Madinah in the new Islamic state, but it is notmerely their utilitarian aspect that is of interest to us here; whatconcerns us at the outset are the intrinsic links of these sciences withIslam. The very foundations of these two branches of science can beshown to have direct connections with the QurāĀn and Sunnah, thetwo sources that define all things Islamic. “It is not a coincidence,”notes George Saliba, “that the mathematical astronomical traditionwhich dealt with the theoretical foundations of astronomy alsodefined itself as a hay’a [cosmological] tradition, even though it rarelytouched upon the QurāĀnic references to the cosmological doctrines”(Saliba 1994, 17). Likewise, other sciences that emerged in Islamiccivilization can be shown to have intrinsic links with the Islamicworldview, even though they received a large amount of materialfrom other civilizations. These links and connections will remain ourcontinuous focus as we construct our narrative about the emergenceof science in Islamic civilization.The geographical expansion of Islam within its first century was,as noted earlier, accompanied by a social revolution that reconfiguredthe social, cultural, and intellectual climate of the old world. Thesame social revolution provided an opportunity for Islamic civilizationto receive a very large amount of scientific material from Greek,Persian, and Indian sources. This infusion was not a random process;rather, it was an organized and sustained effort spread over threecenturies, involving thousands of scientists, scholars, translators,patrons, books, instruments, and rare manuscripts. But it must bepointed out as we approach this fascinating tale that this processcould not have occurred without the ability of the recipient civilizationto absorb. In other words, prior to the arrival of Greek, Indian, andPersian scientific material, there must have been an indigenousscientific tradition ready and able to comprehend and receive this

Aspects of Islamic Scientific Tradition • 13material. We know, for instance, that as early as the second quarter ofthe eighth century, astronomical treatises were being written in Sind(modern Pakistan) in Arabic. These early treatises were often basedon Indian and Persian sources, but they employed technical Arabicterminology that could not have come into existence without thepresence of an already-established astronomical tradition in Islamiccivilization that could then absorb new material from Indian andPersian sources.As we proceed with the account of the emergence of sciencein Islamic civilization, we should note that the Islamic scientifictradition was emerging in a cosmopolitan intellectual milieu andthat those who were making this tradition were not only Muslims butalso Jews, Christians, Hindus, Zoroastrians, and members of otherfaith communities. An Indian astronomer who arrived in the courtof the Abbasid Caliph al-Mansur (r. 754–775) as part of a delegationfrom Sind, for instance, was probably a Hindu. He knew Sanskrit andhelped al-Fazari (fl. second half of the eighth century) translate aSanskrit astronomical text into Arabic; this text contained elementsfrom even older astronomical traditions. The resultant translation,Zij al-Sindhind, became one of the sources of a long tradition of suchtexts in Islamic astronomy (Pingree 1970, 103–23).The emergence of the scientific tradition in this multireligious,multiethnic atmosphere was a dynamic process involving interactionsbetween patrons of learning, scholars, scientists, rulers, guilds, andwealthy merchants. To be sure, the scientific activity at this early timewas not yet an institutionalized effort, but we do know that groupsof scientists were already working together in the second half of theeighth century in Baghdad and other cities of the Abbasid caliphate.We should also keep in mind that this scientific tradition was evolvingat a time when the religious sciences had already been established ona firm foundation, with advanced texts in QurāĀnic studies, philology,grammar, jurisprudence, and other branches of religious studiescirculating among scholars. This fact is particularly important forour study because the prior establishment of religious sciences meantthat the new scientific tradition emerged into an intellectual milieualready shaped by religious thought.

14 • The Making of Islamic ScienceIn the atmosphere of intense creativity that permeated Islamiccivilization during this early period there was considerable strife andpolarization at all levels of society. By the time science emerged as adifferentiated field of study, Islamic polity had already gone throughtwo major internal fissures: the first (656–661) was sparked by theassassination of Uthman, the third Caliph, and led to a civil warin which close Companions of the Prophet found themselves pitchedagainst each other under circumstances which threatened the veryexistence of the Muslim community. During the second rift (680–692), which sprang from two rival claims to the Caliphate, Husayn binAli, the grandson of the Prophet, and all but one of his companionswere killed at Karbala in October 680; Makkah was besieged byarmed men; a radical splinter group, the Khawarij, took control ofmuch of Arabia; and Ibn al-Zubayr, one of the close Companionsof the Prophet, was killed in the sanctified city of Makkah, wherefighting had been declared unlawful by the QurāĀn (Q. 2:217).These events initiated an intense debate among scholars, not onlyabout what was happening and why but also certain other fundamentalissues that arose in this context: Is this a crisis of leadership? Who isqualified to lead the community? Are human acts preordained? Whatare the boundaries of human freedom? What is the role of humanintellect in matters of religion? What is the exact nature of Divinejustice, of Hell and Heaven, and that of Divine attributes? These andrelated theological debates eventually gave birth to different schoolsof thought; some of these schools also developed their own positionson the natural sciences, and we will have occasion to discuss theirpositions in a later chapter.The period during which the earliest scientific works were writtenwitnessed a revolt against the Umayyads, who had taken controlof the Caliphate and shifted the capital of the Islamic state fromMadinah to Damascus. Originating in newly conquered Iraniancities, especially in Merv, this revolt in favor of the Abbasid claim tothe Caliphate moved westward under the leadership of Abu Muslim,who had captured the city of Kufa by the middle of 749. Early in750, Abu’l Abbas (posthumously called al-SaffaĄ) was proclaimed thefirst Abbasid Caliph at Kufa. Two months later, the Umayyads weredecisively defeated at the battle of Greater Zab, and by June 750 most

Aspects of Islamic Scientific Tradition • 15of them had been massacred. Abd al-Rahman I was the sole survivorfrom the ruling family; he escaped to Spain, where he establishedUmayyad rule (755–1031).Abu’l Abbas remained at war for the entire period of hiscaliphate and on his death in 753, his brother, Abu Ja‘far, wasproclaimed Caliph as al-Mansur (the victorious). In 762, al-Mansurdecided to move his capital to a safer place. He himself supervisedthe process of the selection of its location; the choice fell for a smalland ancient town, which was to become the fabled capital of Abbasidrule for the next five hundred years: Baghdad. Spanning both banksof the river Tigris, the new capital was designed as a circular citywith sixteen gates. Its construction began on July 30, 762, a datedetermined by astrologers and engineers, among whom was theaforementioned al-Fazari. The city was officially called Madinat al-Salam, the city of peace.Beginning with the construction of Baghdad we can trace thedevelopments in the scientific tradition in Islamic civilization withmore confidence; our source material becomes more reliable andthere is an exponential increase in available texts.In order to understand the nature of science in Islamiccivilization at this stage of its development, we proceed with anoutline of the various sciences as they emerged during the secondhalf of the eighth century.The Initial FloweringBy the time of the famous alchemist Jabir bin Hayyan, science inIslamic civilization had become considerably well established. Jabiriancorpus is so extensive and varied that some scholars have expresseddoubts about its authorship by a single person (Kraus 1991). Thesehighly sophisticated works, dealing with a vast range of subjects, wereto leave a legacy that continued to influence science and discourseon science well into the fifteenth century. Jabir’s writings deal withthe theory and practice of chemical processes and procedures,classification of substances, astrology, cosmology, theurgy, medicine,alchemy, music, magic, pharmacology, and several other disciplines.What provides an internal cohesion to this corpus is the overall

16 • The Making of Islamic Scienceframework of inquiry and, more specifically, his “Theory of Balance.”According to Jabir, all that exists in the cosmos has a cosmic balance.This balance is present at various levels and reflects the overallharmony of all that exists.In addition to Jabir, many lesser-known scientists of this perioddemonstrated keen interest in astronomy, mathematics, cosmology,and medicine. Only a small number of fragmented works from thisperiod have so far been studied, and this does not allow us to traversethe early history of Islamic scientific tradition. Texts available tohistorians of science take us directly into the first half of the ninthcentury, when Baghdad had already become the intellectual andscientific capital of the Abbasid empire, providing scientists patronageand opportunities to experiment, discuss, and discover. Most of thesescientists were interested in more than one branch of science, as wasusual at that time. The highest concentration of scientific activityat this early stage is, however, in mathematics, astronomy, alchemy,natural history, and medicine.It is important to pay attention to this early period of Islamicscientific tradition, because the massive amount of Greek workssubsequently translated into Arabic have created the erroneousimpression that Islamic scientific tradition came into existencethrough the Translation Movement, and that all it did was to preserveGreek science for later transmission to Europe.Greek ConnectionThat the Islamic scientific tradition preceded the translationmovement, which brought a large number of foreign scientific textsinto this emerging tradition, is beyond doubt; even our meagerresources amply prove this. Astronomy, alchemy, medicine, andmathematics were already established fields of study before any majortranslations were made from Greek, Persian, or Indian sources.Translations were done to enrich the tradition, not to create it, assome Orientalists have claimed.In the field of astronomy, for instance, a very accomplishedgeneration of astronomers, which included Yaqub b. Tariq (fl. secondhalf of the eighth century) and several others, was already at work

Aspects of Islamic Scientific Tradition • 17before the great translation movement (Saliba 2007 and 1994, 16).Saliba also shows how this early astronomical tradition was related toQurāĀnic cosmology. Pre-Islamic astronomy (known as anwa’), whichpredicted and explained seasonal changes based on the rising andsetting of fixed stars, was a subject of interest for QurāĀnic scholars aswell as for the early lexicographers, who produced extensive literatureon the anwa’ and manazil (lunar mansions) concepts (Saliba 1994, 17).The large amount of scientific data and theories that came intothe Islamic scientific tradition from Greek, Persian, and Indiansources were not simply passively translated for later transmissionto Europe. In fact, translated material went through constant anddetailed examination and verification, and was accepted or rejectedon the basis of experimental tests and observations. This process ofscrutiny started as early as the ninth century—that is to say, almostcontemporaneously with the translation movement. The traditionof the production of astronomical tables, for instance, may havebeen inspired by the Ptolemaic Handy Tables tradition, but thetables produced by Muslim astronomers were not merely an Arabicreproduction of Ptolemaic tables; they were the result of astronomicalobservations that began as early as the first half of the ninth centurywith the expressed purpose of “updating the Zijes, inspired by theHandy Tables” (Saliba 1994, 18). Furthermore, as Saliba points out,no astronomer working in the early part of the ninth centurycould still accept the Ptolemaic value for precession, solarapogee, solar equation, or the inclination of the ecliptic.The variations were so obvious that they must have becomeintolerable and could no longer be explained without fullrecourse to a long process of questioning the very foundationof the validity of all the precepts of Greek astronomy. (Saliba1994, 18)This critical attitude toward received material was not accidentalnor a passing phenomenon; among other things, it gave rise toa novel tradition of shukuk literature, which cast doubts on varioustheoretical assumptions of Greek science, called for a reexaminationof observational data, produced texts that dealt with internalcontradictions in each branch of Greek science, and produceda critical attitude toward the translated texts, which spurred a

18 • The Making of Islamic Sciencemovement for their revision, both at the level of experiment andtheory. Abu Bakr Zakaria al-Razi’s yet-to-be-published Kitab al-Shukuk Ala Jalinus (Doubts Concerning Galen), and Ibn al-Haytham’sal-Shukuk Ala Batlamyus, Dubitationes in Ptolemaeum are excellentexamples of this kind of literature (Sabra and Shehaby 1971). Thetranslation movement is examined in more detail in a subsequentsection of this chapter.Islam and its Scientific TaditionWas there any connection between Islam and the scientifictradition that was emerging in Islamic civilization in the eighthcentury? Can this science be called “Islamic science”? These twoquestions are central to this book and will be examined throughout,but it may be beneficial to briefly mention the current prevalentposition in this regard, which holds that Islam had nothing to dowith the scientific tradition that emerged in the Islamic civilization.In fact, this approach is not specific to Islam; such accounts ofscience conceive all sciences, at all times and in all civilizations, to beenterprises totally independent of religion—and if any interactionbetween religion and science becomes unavoidable, it is normallyperceived as negative. For numerous reasons, this opinion regards anyrelationship between Islam and science with extra suspicion. Someeven go as far as to say there is, in fact, no such thing as a normativeIslam, and that all we can say with certainty is that there arenumerous kinds of Islam—an Islam of the Makkan period, an Islamof the time when the Prophet was establishing a state in Madinah,an Umayyad Islam, an Abbasid Islam, and so on (Gutas 2003). Thisapproach to the question of Islam’s relationship with science notonly rejects the notion of anything that can be called “normative” or“essential” Islam, it also claims thatIslam, as a religion, and at whatever historical moment itis taken, is a specific ideology of a particular, historicallydetermined society. As such, like all other social ideologiesthat command adherence and respect by the majority of thepopulation because of their emotive content, it is inert in itself

Aspects of Islamic Scientific Tradition • 19Opening page of Ibn al-Haytham’s Kitab al-Manazir (Optics) from anold manuscript. Courtesy of Maktabah al-Fatih..

20 • The Making of Islamic Scienceand has no historical agency but depends completely on who isusing it and to what ends. (Gutas 2003, 218)Gutas is not alone; battalions of latter-day postmodernists,secular historians of science, neo-Orientalists, and even sociologistswho have an aversion to religion hold the same view, under theinfluence of contemporary postmodernism. This comes in starkcontrast to the nineteenth- and early-twentieth-century Orientalists,who spent all their energies in constructing a homogeneous Islamin which an “orthodoxy” could be identified and posited against anopposing tradition of “free thinking.” Since the last decade of thetwentieth century, and more so since the beginning of the twentyfirstcentury, the various effects of postmodernism have been busyat deconstruction and the creation instead of a fluid Islam thathas nothing stable at any level. Thus, instead of the monolithic,homogenized, rarified, and static Islam of the Orientalists, we nowhave an Islam that can be fundamentally different across—andwithin—regions and eras. Needless to say, both extremes haveadded little clarity to the conceptual categories so essential for realcommunication.Here we are brought to an interesting contradiction in muchof this thought: even though it is claimed there is no “essentialIslam,” one can still safely speak of some “Islamic” phenomena—forexample, Islamic calligraphy and Islamic poetry. While the possibilityof an “Islamic science” is immediately denied, the “Islamic garden”and “Islamic architecture” do not undergo the same vehementreductionism. Furthermore, and even more interesting is that whiledenying Islam any essential nature, proponents of this thought createan essential science separate from any wider context or framework.Such accounts of the scientific activity in Islamic civilizationignore the QurāĀnic conception of nature outlined through verses,giving us a systematic and coherent view of the subject of scientificinvestigation—nature. Because of the antagonism toward thefoundational relationship between Islam and the scientific traditionthat was cultivated in Islamic civilization for eight hundred years,such accounts also fail to adequately explain the developmentof those branches of science that were directly related to Islamicpractices: astronomy used to determine the distance and direction

Aspects of Islamic Scientific Tradition • 21toward Makkah (the direction Muslims face for their obligatoryprayers five times a day); geography; geodesy; cartography;mawaqeet (the science of timekeeping); and other such branches ofscience that have a direct relationship with Islamic practices. Theseare not simply the cases of “science in the service of religion,” as issometimes claimed; rather, these sciences emerged from a specificview of nature anchored in Islam.The contemporary quasi-postmodern approach to Islam has alsocreated an academic atmosphere, which inhibits empirical studiesof the connections between Islam and the scientific tradition thatexisted in Islamic civilization prior to the modern era. When seenin its proper perspective, Islam is not a fluid conceptual frameworkthat keeps changing with time; rather, an Islamic way of being canbe verifiably traced back to the life of the Prophet of Islam—a lifelived in the full light of history and preserved with great care forposterity. This concrete and real life of Muhammad is at the heartof the Islamic way of life. This life, which is considered to be a livingmodel of the QurāĀn, is not an abstract idea needing theologicalinterpretation. Thus, while it is true that within the broad contoursof the Islamic civilization all kinds of rulers, patrons of learning,scholars, and scientists have existed and continue to exist, and thatwhat any individual ruler believed or believes may influence thecourse of Islamic civilization to some extent, no individual defines it.Islamic civilization is, as any other civilization, defined by its beliefsystem, a priori presuppositions, and a legal and moral framework.It is this framework arising out of Islamic beliefs and practices thatcreated the matrix from which intrinsic links between religion andthe sciences grew and flourished in the Muslim lands.Another dimension of these studies has to do with hastyjudgments passed regarding the overall achievements of Islamicscientific tradition and with setting its demise in the twelfth century.Both of these judgments were passed early in the nineteenth century,when only a fraction of the source material available today had beendiscovered and studied, but they continue to remain the mainstreamversion. David King has recently lamented in his monumental workIn Synchrony with the Heavens: Studies in Astronomical Timekeeping andInstrumentation in Medieval Islamic Civilization:

22 • The Making of Islamic ScienceSome dated notions wide-spread amongst the “informed public”and even amongst historians of science include the following:1.The Muslims were fortunate enough to be the heirs to the sciencesof Antiquity.2.They cultivated these sciences for a few centuries but never reallyachieved much that was original.3. They provided, mainly in Islamic Spain, a milieu in which eagerEuropeans emerging out of the Dark Ages could benefit fromthese Ancient Greek sciences once they had learned how totranslate them from Arabic into Latin.Islamic science, therefore, one might argue, is of no consequenceper se for the development of global science and is important onlyinsofar as it marks a rather obscure interlude between a moresophisticated Antiquity and a Europe that later became more civilized.What happened in fact was something rather different. TheMuslims did indeed inherit the sciences of Greek, Indian and PersianAntiquity. But within a few decades they had created out of thispotpourri a new science, now written in Arabic and replete with newMuslim contributions, which flourished with innovations until the 15 thcentury and continued thereafter without any further innovations ofconsequence until the 19 th . (King 2004, xvi)Despite the large amount of new material discovered, published,and studied since those early notions were formed, not manycontemporary writers are willing to reexamine the erroneousparadigm postulated by Goldziher and his generation, which pitIslam against “foreign sciences” (Goldziher 1915). These earlyjudgments were also based, in part, on the works of medievalEuropean scholars who themselves were aware of only a minisculebody of literature on Islamic scientific tradition, mostly retrievedfrom Islamic Spain (al-Andalus), a region that lay outside the maincenters of Islamic scientific activity. It was not until the nineteenthand twentieth centurieswhen historians of science from a multiplicity of nationalbackgrounds investigated Islamic scientific manuscripts inlibraries all over Europe and then in the Near East. Their

Aspects of Islamic Scientific Tradition • 23investigations revealed a intellectual tradition of proportionsthat no medieval or Renaissance European could ever haveimagined: anyone who might doubt this should look at themonumental bio-bibliographical writings of Heinrich Suter,Carl Brokelmann, and Fuat Sezgin. (King 2004, xvii)Even though King’s book is concerned with only one aspect ofIslamic science (astronomical timekeeping and instrumentation), ithas brought to the field of history of Islamic science a large amountof new materialwhich has become known only in the past 30 years. Inevitably[it] modifies the overall picture we have of Islamic science.And it so happens that the particular intellectual activity thatinspired these materials is related to the religious obligationto pray at specific times. The material presented here makesnonsense of the popular modern notion that religion inevitablyimpedes scientific progress, for in this case, the requirementsof the former actually inspired the progress of the latter forcenturies. (King 2004, xvii)Since this book is not on the history of Islamic scientific traditionbut on the relationship between Islam and science, it cannot go intofurther details, but it is clear that what remains to be recovered andstudied from the original sources in various branches of scienceis far greater than what has been studied so far, and that a finalassessment of the Islamic scientific tradition can only be made afterfurther source material has been carefully examined by competenthistorians and scholars.Before exploring various aspects of the Islam and sciencerelationship, it must be pointed out that sciences cultivated inIslamic civilization were not always the work of Muslims; in fact,a considerable number of non-Muslims were part of this scientifictradition. What made this science Islamic were its integral connectionswith the Islamic worldview, the specific concept of nature providedby the QurāĀn, and the numerous abiding concerns of Islamictradition that played a significant role in the making of the Islamicscientific enterprise. There were, of course, at times bitter disputesbetween proponents of various views on the nature of the cosmos,its origin, and its composition, but all of these tensions were within

24 • The Making of Islamic Sciencethe broader doctrines of Islam, which conceived the universe in itsown specific manner—a definable, specific, and distinct conceptionthat placed a unique, personal, and singular Creator at the center ofall phenomena. Viewed from this perspective, the Islam and sciencenexus can be explored as a much more fruitful encounter within thegreater matrix of Islamic civilization.Islamic Science or Natural Philosophy?As already mentioned, our current knowledge of primary sourcesabout the first half of the eighth century does not permit us totrace the beginning of the natural sciences in Islamic civilizationin detail. By the end of that formative century, however, therewas already a small and vibrant scientific community whosemembers were exploring the world of nature in a milieu filled withintellectual curiosity and creative energy. As was usual at that time,this community consisted of individuals who were interested in awide range of subjects dealing with nature, history, and philosophy,and not with just one particular branch of science. Their work issometimes called natural philosophy rather than science. This term isalso used for the enterprise of science that existed in the Greek andRoman civilizations. This linkage adds weight to the view that sciencein Islamic civilization was somehow merely an extension of theearlier Greek and Roman science. There was, however, no one termin Greek or Latin equivalent to our contemporary term science, andwhat we understand as science was often called philosophy or inquiryconcerning nature by the Greeks and Romans themselves (Lloyd 1973,xi–xiii). Unlike Greek and Latin, Arabic does have a specific word forscience: al-‘ilm. This word as well as its derivatives frequently occursin the QurāĀn. It is used to denote all kinds of knowledge, not justthe knowledge pertaining to the study of nature, but this semanticlinkage of all branches of knowledge does not mean that knowledgewas not differentiated or classified into various hierarchical branches.Rather, it indicates that within a given classification of knowledge, allbranches of knowledge were intimately linked through a vertical axisrunning through the entire epistemological scheme—a grounding inthe QurāĀnic concept of knowledge.

Aspects of Islamic Scientific Tradition • 25It is, therefore, conceptually problematic to use the Aristotelianterm natural philosophy as an equivalent for those branches ofknowledge that dealt with the study of nature in Islamic civilization.This term may be a correct way of describing Greek and Romanscientific traditions, but its use here is applied to a very differentconceptual scheme. Although a large amount of scientific datafrom the Greek tradition came into Arabic, this transfer was notaccompanied by an incorporation of the Greek epistemology fromwhich the term natural philosophy originally emerged.The term natural philosophy, often used interchangeably withphysics, emerged from within the Aristotelian classification ofknowledge into three broad categories: metaphysics, mathematics,and physics. Metaphysics deals with unchanging things such asGod and spiritual substances; mathematics studies unchangingabstractions not God or spiritual substances; and physics studieschangeable things in the natural world, including both animate andinanimate bodies. With regard to physics, although he accordeda high degree of importance to sense perception, he maintainedthat knowledge about nature cannot be derived by means of senseperception alone; to attain scientific knowledge about the physicalworld, universal propositions—obtained from sense perceptions bymeans of induction—are essential (Aristotle 1984, 132).Aristotle’s entire classification scheme, however, is ultimatelydependent on his idea of God and the creation of the world. Hebelieved in an eternal world, ultimately caused by an impersonaldeity eternally absorbed in self-contemplation. His eternal world wasrationally structured and comprehensive, but it was, nevertheless, aworld without any direct involvement of the deity. It was a world inwhich bodies were composed of matter and form and in which changewas caused by four types of causes: material, formal, efficient, andfinal. These causes could produce four kinds of changes in a body:substantial change involved change of form (wood to ashes by fire);qualitative change involved change of a certain quality of body(the change of a green leaf into a yellow leaf); quantitative changeinvolved change in the size of a body; and change of place involvedmovement of the body from one area to another. Thus, for Aristotle,the study of nature by means of natural philosophy was the study

26 • The Making of Islamic Scienceand analysis of causes and the changes these causes produced. Hisnatural philosophy (physics) embraced all bodies, and included thestudy of the processes of generation and corruption of compoundedbodies from four simple substances (earth, fire, air, water) as well asthe study of animals and plants. Since in Aristotle’s conception of thedomain of knowledge, natural philosophy and physics are synonymous,the same terminology is sometimes applied to the Islamic scientifictradition, where the Arabic word Tabi‘at (physics) is used to describeall branches of science as well as physics itself. This usage can leadto complications, especially when individual branches of science areknown to have their own specific names.Aristotle’s concept of God as well as his belief in the eternity of theworld was in direct opposition to the QurāĀnic concept of God and theworld. Thus, even though a large amount of Aristotelian philosophywas incorporated into the Islamic philosophical tradition, his deitywas unacceptable. The translations of his works thus created a tensionwithin the emerging Islamic scientific tradition. The subsequent storyof the interaction of Islam and science is, to a large extent, a storyof how Muslim philosophers and scientists dealt with this tension. Wewill explore various facets of this tension in the next section.When the study of nature emerged in Islamic tradition as a fullydifferentiated field, it found its place within a preexisting frameworkof classification of knowledge. This classification scheme follows acertain pattern based on the QurāĀnic concepts both of knowledgeand the faculties granted to human beings. Within this study ofnature, innumerable specific disciplines emerged, which were in turnrefined and further distinguished. Thus, for example, we have titleslike the celebrated Kitab al-Manazir (Optics) of Ibn al-Haytham andeven more specific titles like Kitab tahdid nihâyât al-amakin li’tashihmusafat al-masakin (The Book for the Determination of the Coordinates ofPositions for the Correction of Distances between Cities) of al-Biruni. It wasalso common to use titles such as Kitab al-Nujum (Book on Stars) forworks on astronomy and Kitab ilm al-hindasah (Book on the Science ofGeometry) for works on geometry. Certain Muslim philosophers moreheavily influenced by Aristotle (e.g. al-Kindi, d. ca. 873; al-Farabi,d. 950; Ibn Sina, d. 1037; and Ibn Rushd, d. 1198) did in fact utilizethe Aristotelian model for classification of knowledge, but even they

Aspects of Islamic Scientific Tradition • 27had to modify his essential elements in order to incorporate the basicbelief system of Islam. Thus even those schemes of classification ofknowledge that were heavily influenced by Aristotle retained essentialIslamic concepts regarding God, human beings, and the nature ofthis world. Other classification schemes, especially those of al-Ghazali(d. 1111) and Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406), attempted to remove Aristotelianinfluences altogether.The Translation Movement and its Impact on the Developmentof Science in Islamic CivilizationFrom about the middle of the eighth to the middle of the eleventhcentury, a systematic, elaborate, sustained, and well-organizedtranslation movement brought almost all philosophical and scientificbooks available in the Near East and the Byzantine Empire intoArabic. This translation movement has now been the focus ofscholarly studies for over a century and a half, and this scholarshiphas documented a great deal of historical data and information.Thanks to the discovery and study of numerous manuscripts, wecan identify numerous Greek, Pahlavi, and Indian works and theirtranslators, as well as subsequent translators. The scope of thistranslation movement can be judged from the range of subjectscovered, which included the entire Aristotelian philosophy, alchemy,mathematics, astronomy, astrology, geometry, zoology, physics,botany, health sciences, pharmacology, and veterinary science. Theextent of social, political, and financial patronage this movementreceived can be gleaned from the social classes that supported it,and included caliphs, princes, merchants, scholars, scientists, civilservants, and military leaders.Over the past 150 years, the study of this translationmovement has yielded many valuable texts that have enhancedour understanding of the role of Greek science and philosophyin the making of the Islamic scientific tradition. At the same time,inaccuracies and stereotypes have crept into some of these accounts,and this is especially true for those works that attempt to identify thetranslation movement as the main cause of the origination of Islamicscientific tradition. Thus, it has been claimed that

28 • The Making of Islamic Sciencethe translation movement was the result of the scholarlyzeal of a few Syriac-speaking Christians who … decidedto translate certain works out of altruistic motives for theimprovement of society. The second theory, rampant in muchmainstream historiography, attributes it to the wisdom andopen-mindedness of a few “enlightened rulers” who, conceivedin a backward projection of European enlightenment ideology,promoted learning for its own sake. (Gutas 1998, 3)Gutas claims both of these theories fall apart under close scrutiny.He states that the translation movement was “too complex and deeprootedand too influential in a historical sense for its causes to fallunder these categories—even assuming that these categories are atall valid for historical hermeneutics” (Gutas 1998, 4).This movement was unprecedented in the transmission ofknowledge. It was a movement that enriched the Arabic language byforcing its philologists to coin new technical terms, forced the bestminds of the time to find ways to accommodate, discard, or transformtheories and ideas that conflicted with their religious beliefs, broughta very large amount of scientific and philosophical data into Islamiccivilization, and produced tensions and conflicts within the Islamicintellectual tradition that were, in the final analysis, greatly beneficialto the development of Islamic scientific tradition.Although translation activity had already begun during thepre-Abbasid period, it was the Abbasids who provided resources fora sustained and systematic process of translation of scientific textsinto Arabic. The translation movement became more organized andreceived financial and administrative impetus after the founding ofBaghdad by al-Mansur (r. 754 –775). Three distinct phases can beidentified in this movement. The first began before the middle ofthe second century of Islam, during the reign of al-Mansur. Majortranslators of this first phase were Ibn al-Muqaffa (d. 139/756); hisson, Ibn Na‘ima (fl. eighth century); Theodore Abu Qurra (d. ca.826), a disciple of John of Damascus (d. 749) who held a secretarialpost under the Umayyad Caliphs; Thabit ibn Qurrah (d. 901), aSabian mathematician; Eustathius (fl. ninth century), who alongwith Theodore Abu Qurra translated for al-Kindi; and Ibn al-Bitriq(877–944), who was a member of the circle of the Caliph al-Ma’mun.

Aspects of Islamic Scientific Tradition • 29Al-Ma’mun’s accession marks the beginning of the second phase ofthe translation movement.Many new translators were involved during the second phase ofthe translation movement, which was led by Hunayn ibn Ishaq. Thesetranslators refined many translations of the first phase and extendedthe range of material being translated. For instance, Aristotle’s Topicswas first translated into Arabic from a Syriac translation around782, during the reign of the third Abbasid Caliph al-Mahdi (d. 785).This was done by the Nestorian patriarch Timothy I with the helpof Abu Nuh, the Christian secretary of the governor of Mosul. Thesame work was retranslated about a century later, this time from theoriginal Greek, by Abu Uthman al-Dimashqi, and, approximatelyfifty years later, it was translated a third time by Yahya ibn Adi (d.974) from a Syriac version (Gutas 1998, 61).During the third phase of the translation movement, furtherrefinement of the translated material took place and commentariesstarted to appear. This phase, beginning with the dawn of the tenthcentury and ending around 1020, also produced textual criticismsthat scrutinized translated material from scientific as well asphilosophical points of view.By the middle of the eleventh century the three-hundred-yearoldtranslation movement had reached its end. The tension betweenIslamic beliefs and ideas, concepts, theories, and data contained inthese texts however was the main kinetic force for initiating a processof appropriation and transformation of the received material. Thiswas a slow and deliberate process over the course of which translatedworks were examined, classified, and sorted into categories. It wasnot official scrutiny by some office of the state or religious authority,but an organic process of ordering new ideas in the light of revelationundertaken by Muslim intellectuals who debated, disagreed, passedjudgments on each other, fought bitter battles over ideas, and lost orgained support from their peers. This inner struggle of a traditionin the making against foreign currents that were coming into its foldinvolved a wide range of philosophers and scientists. Some of themfirmly aligned themselves with the Greek philosophical tradition,while others wrote against it. Those in between these two extremesattempted to harmonize new ideas with Islam’s worldview based on

30 • The Making of Islamic Sciencerevelation. The end result of this long process was the appearanceof a tradition of learning that examined, explored, and synthesizedits own unique perspectives on nature and the human condition—perspectives that were distinctly Islamic, though not monolithic.Some Recent Perspectives on the Translation MovementThis brief description of the translation movement provides someinsights into the intellectual currents flowing into the Islamictradition during that time. During these three centuries, thematerial infused into the Islamic tradition included philosophy aswell as works on various branches of science drawn from the Greek,Persian, and Indian sources. This process of incorporation of foreignscientific and philosophical thought into the Islamic tradition and itsconsequences has been thoroughly studied by historians of scienceand philosophy, and their studies have yielded opinions rangingfrom reductionism to precursorism—two explanatory terms first usedby Sabra in an important paper (Sabra 1987). Reductionism, in thiscontext, refers to theview that the achievements of Islamic scientists were merely areflection—sometimes faded, sometimes bright, or more orless altered—of earlier (mostly Greek) examples. Precursorism(which has a notorious tendency to degenerate into a diseaseknown as ‘precursitis’) is equally familiar: it reads the futureinto the past, with a sense of elation. (Sabra 1994, 223–24)Despite the work of Sabra and a handful of other historians ofscience, the large-scale infusion of ideas, theories, and scientific datafrom the Greek scientific tradition into Islamic science through thetranslation movement has become a defining feature of the Islamicscientific tradition itself; many histories of science tend to regard theeight hundred years of scientific activity in the Muslim world as beingno more than some kind of depot where Greek science was parkedand from where it was retrieved by Europe in later centuries. AsSabra has noted, the transcivilizational transmission of science was animportant event in history, butapparently because of the importance of that role in worldintellectual history many scholars have been led to look at the

Aspects of Islamic Scientific Tradition • 31medieval Islamic period as a period of reception, preservation,and transmission, and this in turn has affected the way in whichthey have viewed not only individual achievements of thatperiod but the whole of its profile. (Sabra 1994, 225)The consequences of this approach toward the Islamic scientifictradition are visible in many science textbooks, where students areled to believe that nothing important happened in science betweenthe Greek scientific activity and the Renaissance; Islamic scientifictradition is either not mentioned at all or is mentioned in a paragraphdefining it as a repository of Greek science. That this distortion ofhistorical facts still predominates is unfortunate, as what came intothe body of Islamic thought from outside was neither accidental normarginal. It would be far more meaningful to understandthe transmission of ancient science to Islam … as an act ofappropriation performed by the so-called receiver. Greekscience was not thrust upon Muslim society any more than itwas later upon Renaissance Europe. What the Muslims of theeighth and ninth centuries did was to seek out, take hold ofand finally make their own a legacy which appeared to themladen with a variety of practical and spiritual benefits. And in sodoing they succeeded in initiating a new scientific tradition in anew language which was to dominate the intellectual culture ofthe large part of the world for a long period of time. ‘Reception’is, at best, a pale description of that enormously creative act.(Sabra 1994, 226)The translation movement was a highly complex phenomenonof cross-cultural transmission that involved a very large numberof people of diverse interests. It had political, cultural, intellectual,and religious motivations. It came into existence owing to certaininternal needs of the Islamic polity of the time and, once in existence,it produced enormous creative energy in an intellectual climatealready filled with curiosity, ready to use whatever it could for itsnew ventures. Some of the new material was regarded as dangerous,extraneous, and foreign by certain quarters. This “foreignness” hasbeen used by some scholars to draw the reductionistic conclusion thatthe scientific tradition in Islam was nothing but a “foreign” entitythat somehow survived despite the opposition it faced from religious

32 • The Making of Islamic Sciencecircles. This view has been succinctly called “the marginality thesis”and its validity has been challenged on sound historical grounds(Sabra 1994, 229–30). Sabra and other historians of science havealso convincingly made a case for the originality of Islamic scientifictradition (Kennedy 1960; Shlomo 1986; King 1999).z

L3JFacets of the Islam andScience Relationship(Eighth to the Sixteenth Century)This chapter explores specific developments in certain branchesof science in order to describe the relationship betweenIslam and the science cultivated in Islamic civilization between theeighth and the sixteenth centuries. This account is, of course, nota comprehensive history of Islamic scientific tradition, but simplyan overview of certain developments in those branches of sciencethat had a more direct relationship with religion. Some branches ofscience (such as mechanics) had little to do with religion in any directway, whereas others (such as cosmology and geography) had a directrelationship with religion and hence are given more attention in thefollowing sections.Cosmology, Cosmogony, and CosmographyNo other branch of science has a more direct relationship withreligious beliefs than cosmology—the science that deals with theorigin and development of the universe. Yet it is a relationship thatis characterized by a great deal of confusion. What is meant bycosmology today is entirely different from what was meant by thesame term in the eighth century. The use of similar terms in science,philosophy, and religious discourse has also added to the confusion.For instance, what Aristotle meant by celestial region is not at all thecelestial region of the Sufis, though both may use the term celestial todenote the region beyond the terrestrial zone. The celestial region of

34 • The Making of Islamic Sciencethe Sufis is populated by vastly different entities than that of Aristotleand has totally different characteristics. Cosmology, of course, wasmore philosophy than science during the period of the Greek andIslamic scientific traditions and even now, while a great deal ofexperimental data has come into existence that has direct bearing onthe question of the origin of the cosmos, it remains a theoretical field.Islamic cosmological beliefs are rooted in the QurāĀn itself,which deals extensively with this issue. Thus, for our purposes, themain question is how these so-called cosmological verses of theQurāĀn were understood by exegetes, philosophers, and scientistsduring the period under consideration (the eighth to sixteenthcenturies). Debates arose from the tensions generated by the arrivalof Aristotelian cosmology in the Islamic tradition, which, in turn,contributed to the making of certain cosmological doctrines.As has been stated in the first chapter, the QurāĀn treats theentire created order as a sign, âya. This includes the cosmos and allthat it contains. A sign, by definition, points to something other thanitself. Thus, when seen from the QurāĀnic perspective, the cosmosand all that it contains are signs of a unique Creator who createdthrough a simple command: Be (Q. 36:82). Although the QurāĀn givesa very specific account of the creation of the cosmos, it does not tellus with what it was created or when. In addition, it is important tokeep in mind that the QurāĀnic cosmos is not merely physical, madeup of stars, planets, and other physical entities; it also encompasses aspiritual cosmos populated by nonphysical entities. The nonphysicalcosmos, which consists of innumerable levels of existence, is farsuperior to the physical cosmos, which occupies a relatively lowposition in the hierarchy of existence.The QurāĀnic perspective on the creation of the physical cosmoscan be summarized as follows: the cosmos was created by God for apurpose. After creating the cosmos and all that it contains, God didnot leave it to itself; in fact, the entire created order is perpetuallysustained by God; without this sustenance it could not exist. At acertain pre-fixed moment, the exact knowledge of which remainswith God alone, everything that exists in the world will perish. Thiswill be followed by resurrection and a new kind of life under anentirely new set of laws.

Facets of the Islam and Science Relationship • 35This general account of creation and its end can be found inmany verses, supplemented with specific details spread throughoutthe QurāĀn. The cosmos was created in six days (Q. 7:54–56; 25:59),the Earth in two (Q. 41:9); God also created the seven heavens (Q.2:29), one upon another (Q. 67:3). God adorned the sky with stars (Q.67:5); He is the One who has set in motion all the stars and planets,so that humanity may be guided in its travels by their positions (Q.6:97); He is the One Who covers the day with the night and thenight with the day (Q. 39:5). It is important to note that the word“day” used in these verses has always been understood in the Islamictradition in a nonquantitative manner. The QurāĀn itself makes itclear that a day with the Lord is as a thousand years of your reckoning(Q. 22:47). In another verse it mentions a day whereof the span is fiftythousand years (Q. 70:4). Because of this fluid time-scale the QurāĀnicaccount of the origin, as well as history, of the cosmos is based on aqualitative conception of time. Although this narration has certainoutward resemblances with the Biblical account of creation, it is inessence very different from the account in Genesis, and this may beone reason why there has been no counterpart to the “young Earth”tradition in Islam.Although the QurāĀn does not explain how or when the cosmoswas created, it does invite its readers to study the physical world.In fact, this QurāĀnic invitation to observe the working of thecosmos is repeated with such insistence that it has now becomecommonplace to use these verses of the QurāĀn to support the claimthat the cultivation of modern science is a religious obligation forMuslims—a duty prescribed by none other than the QurāĀn itself.Whether true or not, this simplistic approach does not do justiceto the purpose of the QurāĀnic invitation, for the QurāĀn invitesits readers to observe the order and regularities of the universe forthe express purpose of understanding the realities that lie beyondthe physical realm. This invitation to observe the physical cosmosis often accompanied by an emphatic reminder that observableorder and regularities are a sign of the presence of the one and onlyCreator. The order observable in the physical cosmos is a testimonyto Divine omnipotence, power, and wisdom.

36 • The Making of Islamic ScienceThe QurāĀnic description of the world played a central role in theemergence of the different cosmographies in Islamic thought. Thesecosmographies describing main features of the cosmos developedthrough a complex process involving numerous currents of thought,including Arabic translations of Greek philosophical works, theinterplay between various schools of thought within the Islamicphilosophical tradition, and theological debates concerning thenature of God, His attributes, His relationship with the world, andother similar issues that had emerged much before the translationmovement out of the internal dynamics of the Muslim community.These issues were not merely intellectual questions arising from theinterpretation of the QurāĀn but also had political, theological, andsocial dimensions. Debates on these questions gave rise to variousschools of thought that eventually solidified into two main schools:the Mu‘tazilah and the Asha‘irah, both of whom were interested incosmology and formulated a comprehensive theory of creation. Ingeneral, it was recognized that the physical cosmos exists within alarger scheme of creation that includes various levels of existence,including the nonphysical, and cannot be separated from this context.The cosmographies of the Sufis, in particular, describe the physicalworld in terms of degrees of being and existence.The cosmographies that emerged in Islamic thought after thetranslation movement were dominated by debates over the questionof the eternity of the world or its ex nihilo creation in time. In manyof today’s mainstream works dealing with the question of creationand eternity of the world in Islamic thought, battle-lines are drawnbetween Hellenized Muslim philosophers and their adversaries,the so-called orthodox thinkers, and the entire debate is shown tohave emerged out of a crisis produced by the translation movement.In reality, the matter is much more nuanced. For instance, manycosmographies divided the physical world into the celestial andterrestrial regions, just as Aristotle did, but this did not imply anall-encompassing acceptance of Aristotelian thought. Even the mostHellenized philosophers of Islam (Ibn Sina and Ibn Rushd) had torecast the Aristotelian cosmos and his concept of its eternity, thoughthey accepted the eternity of the world.

Facets of the Islam and Science Relationship • 37This modification of the Aristotelian cosmos is not merely a cleverway of restating the same thing. For instance, the actual substanceof which the physical cosmos is made was conceived by Aristotle as“matter,, an abstraction that could only be reached by means of athought experiment: in his Metaphysics, after stating that substanceis “that which is not predicated of a subject, but of which all else ispredicated,” he says that this statement itself is obscure, andfurther, on this view, matter becomes substance. For if this is notsubstance, it is beyond us to say what else is. When all else istaken away, evidently nothing but matter remains. For of theother elements some are affections, products, and capacities ofbodies, while length, breadth, and depth are quantities and notsubstances. For a quantity is not a substance; but the substanceis rather that to which these belong primarily. But when lengthand breadth and depth are taken away, we see nothing leftexcept that which is bounded by these, whatever it be; so thatto those who consider the question thus matter alone must seemto be substance. By matter I mean that which in itself is neithera particular thing nor of a certain quantity nor assigned to anyother of the categories by which being is determined. (Aristotle1984, 1625)This description came under attack as early as the secondhalf of the eighth century. Jabir bin Hayyan, for instance, declaredthis conception of matter to be “nonsense,” writing no doubt inthe tradition of Plotinus, who had called it a “mere shadow uponshadow”:[You believe that] it is not a body, nor is it predicated ofanything that is predicated of a body. It is, you claim, theundifferentiated form of things and the element of createdobjects. The picture of this [entity], you say, exists only in theimagination, and it is impossible to visualize it as a definedentity … all of this is nonsense. (Haq 1994, 53)Likewise, Aristotle’s prime matter, which he thought to be eternaland indestructible, was not accepted in the Islamic tradition by themajority of philosopher-scientists. In fact, on closer scrutiny we findthat the many similarities between Aristotelian cosmological traditionand Islamic cosmological schemes are superficial; underneath there

38 • The Making of Islamic Scienceare profound differences between the foundational ideas of the twotraditions. As seen earlier, even those philosophers who acceptedthe eternity of the world a la Aristotle did not accept the Aristoteliansystem in its totality; rather, they devised entirely new conceptualschemes. Ibn Sina is a case in point, and we will examine his ideasalong with their rebuttals by other scholars in the next chapter.The justification for drawing absolute battle-lines betweenphilosophers and theologians weakens when we find that thoughmany Muslim philosophers believed in the eternity of the world therewere also notable exceptions. Al-Kindi, who is universally recognizedas the first true Muslim philosopher, rejected the eternity of matterand the universe, despite the deep influence of Aristotle and Plotinuson his thought. In his treatise On First Philosophy al-Kindi usesthe word ibda‘ (which means to begin something out of nothing) todenote creation ex nihilo. Al-Kindi also develops three arguments forthe creation of the universe: (i) an argument from space, time, andmotion; (ii) an argument from composition; and (iii) an argumentfrom time (Craig 1979, 56).Geography, Geodesy, CartographyOn the clear night of May 24, 997, a twenty-three-year-old man wasstanding outside the Central Asian town of Kath, situated on theriver Oxus, waiting for the eclipse of the moon to begin. Hundredsof miles away, another man by the name of Abu’l Wafa (d. 997 or998) was waiting for the same lunar eclipse to begin in Baghdad.The two men had arranged to use the eclipse of the moon as a timesignal to calculate the difference in longitude between Kath andBaghdad. The first man’s name was Abu Rayhan al-Biruni. He wasborn on September 4, 973 CE, in Khwarizm (now in Uzbekistan)and he died in Ghazna (now Ghazni, Afghanistan) around 1050.His place of birth, which now bears his name, was in the environs ofKath, located on the eastern bank of the river Oxus (whose originalname is Amu Darya), northeast of Khiva. Jurjaniyya (modern Kunya-Urgench, Turkmenistan), the other main city of the region northwestof Khiva, lay on the opposite side of the river. Al-Biruni had spent agood deal of time in Jurjaniyya during the early part of his life and

Facets of the Islam and Science Relationship • 39had begun his scientific training at an early age. “He had studiedwith the eminent Khwariziam astronomer and mathematician AbuNasr Mansur. At the age of seventeen he used a ring graduated inhalves of a degree to observe the meridian solar altitude at Kath,thus inferring its terrestrial latitude” (Kennedy 1980, 147–58).Like many men of learning of his time, al-Biruni was interestedin a wide range of subjects, including astronomy, astrology, appliedmathematics, pharmacology, and geography. “He was not ignorant ofphilosophy and the speculative disciplines, but his bent was stronglytoward the study of observable phenomena, in nature and in man.Within the sciences themselves, he was attracted by those fields thensusceptible of mathematical analysis… about half his total outputis in astronomy, astrology, and related subjects, the exact sciencespar excellence of those days” (Kennedy 1980, 151–52). This man,honored by his contemporaries by the honorific title of “the Master”(al-Ustadh), but “unknown to the medieval West, except perhapsby the garbled name Maître Aliboron” (Kennedy 1980, 156), hasleft us nineteen works on geography, geodesy, and mapping theoryreferenced in various other works (Ali 1967).Al-Biruni’s works on geography were written at a time whenthis science had already been well established in the Muslimworld. Various works by pre-Islamic Egyptian, Indian, Greek,and Persian geographers had been translated into Arabic or werebeing translated. It was a time of great discovery and expansion.New and improved techniques were making sea vessels safer andcapable of longer journeys. Muslim traders, scientists, scholars, andpreachers were traveling the length and breadth of the ancient traderoutes, new cities were coming into existence, and there was a greatinterest in recording and authenticating geographical coordinatesof distant places. At least some of this interest in geography wasspurred by religious requirements such as performing Hajj, theannual pilgrimage that required traveling to Makkah. Many of thesegeographers were also historians, astronomers, mathematicians,chroniclers, and scholars of religion. Abu Rayhan al-Biruni isan excellent example of such a scholar-scientist, as his Book ofthe Determination of the Coordinates of Positions for the Correction ofDistances between Cities proves. It is a mine of information not only

40 • The Making of Islamic Scienceabout geography but also cosmology, history, religious practices,social customs, the political and economic situation of the time,relationships between different scientists, debates between scientistsand scholars of his time, and many other subjects (Al-Biruni, tr. 1967)Al-Biruni did not write his book in isolation; like his otherscientific works, his geographical treatise emerged out of a vibranttradition that had already gone through numerous substantialchanges since its emergence in Islamic civilization. At the dawn ofIslam, Arabs had a practical knowledge of the geographical areasthrough which they traveled or from where pilgrims came to Makkah.They also had a general conception of the nature of the Earth, whichhad been part of their folklore for centuries. This knowledge howeversoon became inadequate for religious as well as practical reasons.The religious aspect of this inadequacy was primarily (but notentirely) due to a certain verse of the QurāĀn revealed to the ProphetSouthEastThree partsLine of prayerat GhaznaWestNorthThe need to determine the direction of Ka‘bah (qiblah) played animportant role in the development of many branches of Islamicscientific tradition, including geography and astronomy. Al-Birunidescribed a simple method for architects and artisans to determineqiblah from Ghazna in his Kitab Tahdid al-Amakin. The method involvesdrawing lines on a polished stable surface of a circle.

Facets of the Islam and Science Relationship • 41approximately sixteen months after his migration to Madinah. Thisverse (Q. 2:144), sometimes called the “verse of the changing ofqiblah,” commanded the Prophet and the believers to turn thy facetoward the inviolable house of worship [the Ka‘bah]; and wherever you allmay be, turn your faces toward it. This religiously binding requirementto face the Ka‘bah for the obligatory prayers five times a day was togive birth to a new dimension of geography. This “sacred geography,”as it is sometimes called (King 1999, 51), is an entirely Islamicsubbranch of geography that also spurred the development of a hostof allied sciences such as mathematics, trigonometry, cartography,and mathematical geography. The need to determine the qiblah waseasily met in Madinah, where everyone knew that the direction ofMakkah was due south, but as soon as Muslim armies started to crossthe frontiers of Arabia this became an urgent issue. One can imaginea Muslim army arriving in a remote town in Iran after crossingnumerous mountains, hills, and deserts and having lost all sense ofdirection, save whatever could be gathered from the movement ofthe sun and the stars. Men in this army would have an urgent need:before the time for the next obligatory prayer they would need toknow the direction of the Ka‘bah. What could they do?The initial solutions were approximate. During the seventh andthe eighth centuries, when new mosques were being built in townsas far apart as Merv in Central Asia and the picturesque Seville inal-Andalus (Spain), Muslims had no truly scientific method forfinding the correct direction toward the Ka‘bah and so relied on folkastronomy. This told them that the rectangular base of the Ka‘bahwas astronomically aligned, with its major axis pointing to the risingof the star Canopus and its minor axis toward the extreme rising ofthe moon at midsummer and its setting at midwinter (King 1999,49). From the ninth century onward, more scientific methods beganto appear.The need to determine the qiblah was, however, not the onlyreason for Muslims to develop a keen interest in geography andallied sciences. In the flow of its narrative, the QurāĀn mentionsseveral ancient nations and places that had incurred God’s wrathbecause of their persistent opposition to prophets who came to guidethem. As Muslims conquered new areas and came across old ruins,

42 • The Making of Islamic Sciencethey attempted to identify them and see which of these had beenmentioned in the QurāĀn. These geographical studies became anintegral part of the commentaries on the QurāĀn. The QurāĀn alsomentions certain mountains (e.g., the mountain where Noah’s boatcame to rest; Mount Tur, where Moses was called by God), sevenskies, and seven earths. These beame yet another direct reason forthe emergence of those branches of geography that were concernedwith the shape of the Earth, its extent, and its topography.Thus, by the time of al-Biruni there had already developedseveral schools of thought that used different frameworks of inquiryfor studying the Earth and its features. Translations brought freshperspectives. During the reign of the Abbasid caliph al-Mansur (753–75), the Sanskrit treatise Surya-Siddhanta was translated into Arabic.Another work of considerable influence that was translated intoArabic at this time was the Aryabhatiya of Aryabhata of Kususmapura(b. 476), in which the author proposed that the daily rotation of theheavens was only an apparent phenomena caused by the rotation ofthe earth on its own axis, and, further, that the proportion of waterand land on the surface of the Earth was equal (Ahmad 1991, 577).Another early influence came from Persia, where the notion of sevenkishwars (Haft Iqlim) was predominant. In this scheme, the worldwas divided into seven equal geometric circles, each representinga kishwar. Persian maritime literature was also influential in thedevelopment of geographical studies in the Islamic tradition.With the translation of Claudius Ptolemy’s Geography into Arabic,Greek influence becomes apparent. Ptolemy’s work was translatedinto Arabic several times during the Abbasid period, and each time itwas translated it appeared with a new critique of the data. As Muslimdomains expanded, new data too was added. In addition to Ptolemy,the Geography of Marinos of Tyre (ca. 70–130), the Timaeus of Plato,and the Meteorology, De caelo, and Metaphysics of Aristotle influencedthe development of geography in the Muslim world. The translatedmaterial produced a great deal of activity, and by the beginning ofthe ninth century the science of geography was firmly established. Itreceived further impetus from Caliph al-Ma’mun (813–33), who had apersonal interest in geography. During his reign, “the measurementof an arc of a meridian was carried out (the mean result gave 562/3

Facets of the Islam and Science Relationship • 43Arab miles as the length of a degree of longitude, a remarkablyaccurate value); the astronomical tables called al-Zidj al-mumtahan(The verified tables) were prepared… [and] a World Map, called al-Suratal-Ma’muniyya was prepared” (Ahmad 1991, 578).FAWHKCMYONDLEZSQBTGVarious mathematical sciences developed to aid astronomy. In thisdiagram, al-Biruni shows how the cotangent of the displacementof the azimuth of the qiblah at Ghazna from the south point can bedetermined. The drawing is based on his Kitab Tahdid al-Amakin.Many Muslim geographers were also philosophers,mathematicians, astronomers, mathematicians, and, more importantfor our discussion, scholars of religion. Among al-Kindi’s 270known works, for instance, there are several treatises on geography,astronomy, logic, metaphysics, and psychology. Other scientistswho wrote on geography during the eighth and the ninth centuriesinclude al-Fazari (eighth century), al-Khwarizmi (d. ca. 847), al-Farghani (d. after 861), al-Balkhi (d. 886), and, most important,Ibn Khurradadhbih (d. 911), who may have initiated the traditionof works generally entitled as al-Masalik wa’l mamalik (Highways andCountries) with a work by that title written in 846 and revised in 885.

44 • The Making of Islamic ScienceIbn Khurradadhbih, a man of great learning, was the director of thePost and Intelligence Department in Baghdad, and his job providedhim with opportunities to travel and encounter a great deal ofgeographical material.Owing to the work of these eighth- and ninth-centurygeographers, two distinct genres appeared: the first dealt with theMuslim world of the time; the second described the geographicalfeatures of the entire known world. Works of the first kind includedinformation on topography and road-systems of the Muslimworld, while the second produced maps and general descriptionsof the entire world. It is of interest for our discussion that not allgeographical works used the same system to describe physical,human, and economic geography. Some presented their materialusing the cardinal directions as their reference points while othersused the Persian system of Iqlims (regions). The latter took Makkahas the center of the world. The works of al-Istakhari (fl. first half oftenth century), Ibn Hawqal (fl. second half of tenth century), and al-Muqaddasi (d. 1000) belong to this category, and they are sometimessaid to belong to the Balkhi School (named after Ibn Sahl al-Balkhi,d. 934). This School “gave a positive Islamic colouring to Arabgeography” (Ahmad 1991, 581), and introduced innovations such asthe element of perspective in cartography. They also gave Makkahthe central position in their geographical representations.Information used by Muslim geographers in their books andmaps increasingly relied on first-hand accounts. Many workscorrected previous Greek, Persian, Indian, and earlier data ofMuslim geographers. Al-Mas‘udi, for instance, “questioned [the]Ptolemaic theory of the existence of a terra incognita in the southernhemisphere, according to which the Indian Ocean was believed tobe surrounded by land on all sides except in the east, where it wasjoined with the Pacific by a sea passage. He says he was told by thesailors of the Indian Ocean (al-bahr al-habashi) that this sea had nolimits toward the south” (Ahmad 1980, 172). Travel accounts oftenprovided an excellent source of information for geographers. Asmaritime travel increased, many new books were written to describeoceans and seafaring.

Facets of the Islam and Science Relationship • 45Encyclopedic works started to appear with the accumulation ofdata. These included world geographies, geographical dictionaries,maritime literature giving details of oceans and coastal regions,compilations specific to various regions, and general travel accounts.The most famous of the last category are The Travels of Ibn Jubayr (d.1217) and Ibn Battuta (d. 1377). Abu’l Fida (d. 1331) has left us anoutstanding work called Taqwim al-buldan, a general geography witha prologue full of interesting observations such as the gain or loss of aday as one travels around the world and descriptions of various rivers,lakes, seas, and mountains.One of the greatest geographers of the twelfth and thirteenthcenturies was Yaqut al-Hamavi (d. 1229). Of Greek parentage, hewas taken prisoner as a young boy and brought to Baghdad, wherehe accepted Islam, learned Arabic, and spent the rest of his life intraveling throughout the Muslim world. A man of outstandinglearning, Yaqut left us numerous encyclopedic works, four of whichhave been discovered. Among them is his Mu‘ajam al-buldan, whichhas achieved the status of a classic and is still used as a reference workby scholars in the Muslim world as well as in the West. Arranged inalphabetical order, the Mu‘ajam has preserved a wealth of informationnot only on geographical positions, boundaries, and coordinates butalso on scholars, artists, and scientists. Passionately given to detail,Yaqut’s geographical work is intimately linked with history; he wasequally concerned with correct orthography, because he was awarethat slight sloppiness could lead to big blunders. His inspiration tocompile such a geographical dictionary came from the QurāĀn, as hehimself writes in his introduction (Yaqut, tr. 1959).The Islamic West (al-Maghrib) produced its own specificgeographies based on original observations, translations, and travelaccounts. Al-Idrisi (d. 1165) is famous for his Kitab nuzhat al-mushtaqfi’l khtiraq al-afaq, written at the request of Roger II, the Norman Kingof Sicily. The book is the key to a large silver planisphere that al-Idrisihad presented to the monarch and completed in 1154. The bookwas illustrated with maps of various regions, and the six survivingcomplete manuscripts also contain the planisphere described in itsintroductory chapter.

46 • The Making of Islamic ScienceThe Ottomans translated many Arabic texts into Turkishand produced new works. They further rearranged old material,corrected geographical information, and added new observations. Forexample, Abu’l Fida’s Taqwim al-Buldan was translated into Turkishby Sipahizade Mehemmed bin Ali (d. 1588), who supplemented andrearranged the material in alphabetical order. Turkish geographersalso produced considerable new literature on marine geography andnavigation. Seyyidi Ali Re’is bin Huseyn (d. 1562), also known asKatib-e Rumi, wrote a book on the Indian Ocean entitled al-Muhit,using the experiences of South Arabian sailors—some of whomhad served as guides to Vasco de Gama on his voyage to Calicut(Taeschner 1991, 588). Piri Muhyi’l Din Re’is (d. 1554) produceda world map in 1513, for which he used as sources maps containingPortuguese discoveries up to 1508, and another map containingdiscoveries of Christopher Columbus during his third voyage (1498).He had obtained this map from a Spanish sailor who had voyaged withColumbus to America three times and who had been made a Turkishprisoner in 1501 at Valencia by none other than Piri Re’is’s uncle,the famous naval hero Kemal Re’is (Taeschner 1991, 588). One ofthe most comprehensive geographical works of the early seventeenthcentury, written by Mustafa bin Abdallah, popularly known as KatibKhelebi or Haji Khalifa (1609–1657), also uses Muslim as well as atleast one European source, the Atlas Minor (1621) of Gerhard Mercator(Taeschner 1991, 589).Cartography, the science of production of maps and construction ofprojections and designs, became a basic need of the expanding Muslimworld within the first generation. The administrative needs of thenewly conquered lands required detailed descriptions, and early mapsemerged on the basis of first-hand information of the new regions.This tradition was to receive a most direct impetus from the religiousrequirement already mentioned—the need to determine the qiblah.Muslims may have received some Greek, Indian, and Pahlavimaps when the astronomical and geographical texts from theselanguages were translated into Arabic. We do not know when thefirst world map was constructed by Muslims, but we do know that thetradition of making these maps already existed in the ninth century,when a world map was constructed for Caliph al-Ma’mun (813–833)

Facets of the Islam and Science Relationship • 47and named after him as al-Surat al-Ma’muniyya; al-Masu‘di (d. 956)saw it and has left us the following account: “it depicted the universewith spheres, the stars, land and the seas, inhabited and barren(regions of the world), settlements of peoples, cities” (Ahmad 1997,1078). Al-Khwarizmi’s Kitab Surat al-Ard (The Book of the Shape of theEarth) also contained coordinates of places (cities, rivers, mountains),and the original manuscript must have also contained maps, thoughthey have not survived.Cartography after the tenth century developed marked Islamicfeatures, showing the influence of Islamic worldview in variousrealms such as politics and culture as well as various spiritual aspectsof Islam. It emerged out of a new tradition in Islamic geographymentioned already—the so-called Balkhi Tradition, named after AbuZayd Ahmad bin Sahl al-Balkhi (d. 934). Al-Balkhi’s geographicalwork Suwar al-Aqalim, in which he described the geographical featuresof the Muslim world, dividing each province into an iqlim, wasaccompanied by maps that were copied and improved by al-Istakhari(d. 951). His work was then further improved upon by anotherexcellent geographer, Ibn Hawqal (d. 977), who charted twenty-twomaps, including a world map.This new tradition of Islamic cartography differed from theGreco-Muslim tradition in many respects. Here the sacred city ofMakkah occupies the central position; south is placed at the top whilenorth is at the bottom, no doubt because of the reverence shown thissacred city (Ahmad 1997, 1079). In addition to the scientific aspectsof the maps, consideration should be given to the characteristicallyIslamic aesthetics and color schemes, materials used for drawing maps(which ranged from brass to fine silk), and the abiding preoccupationwith a directional grid oriented toward the qiblah, which perpetuallyreminded the believers of the QurāĀnic concept of “the StraightPath.” This physical geography was intimately connected with anonphysical and “sacred geography in which directions, mountains,rivers, islands, etc. become symbols of the celestial world” (Nasr 1968,99). In many cases, scientists have themselves told us that they wereprompted to carry out their science because of the religious needsof the community, or because they felt duty-bound to correct certain

48 • The Making of Islamic Sciencewrong practices. The following passage from the celebrated Mu‘ajamal-Buldan is but one such example:This is a book on the names of countries; on mountains,valleys, and plains; on villages, post-houses, and dwellings; onseas, rivers, and lakes; on idols, graven images, and objectsof heathen worship. I have not undertaken to write this book,nor dedicated myself to composing it, in a spirit of frolic ordiversion. Nor have I been impelled to do so by dread or desire;nor moved by longing for my native land; nor prompted byyearning for one who is loving and compassionate. Rather, Iconsidered it my duty to address myself to this task, and, beingcapable of performing it, I regarded responding to its challengeas an inescapable obligation.I was made aware of it by the great and glorious Book, and wasguided to it by the Great Tidings, wherein Allah said, glory andmajesty to Him, when He wanted to manifest to His creatures Hissigns and warnings and establish their guilt by visiting upon themHis painful wrath: Have they not journeyed through the land? And havethey not hearts to understand with, or ears to hear with? Surely as to thesethings their eyes are not blind, but the hearts which are within their breastsare blind.This is a reproof to him who has journeyed through the world andhas not heeded the warning, and to him who has contemplated thedeparted centuries and has not been deterred. (Yaqut, tr. 1959, 1–2).MathematicsAround the year 825, a man in his twenties was sitting in a room inBaghdad, seeking help from God in writing a book that the Caliphal-Ma’mun (r. 813–833) had encouraged him to write—a concisebook on “restoration” and “balancing” (al-jabr wa’l-muqabalah), whichwould be “useful in the calculation of what men constantly need tocalculate [for their] inheritance and legacies, [their] portions andjudgments, in their trade and in all their dealings with one another[in matters involving] measurement of land, the digging of canals,and geometrical [calculations], and other matters involving theircrafts” (Khwarizmi 1989, 4). Three centuries later, this book was

Facets of the Islam and Science Relationship • 49partially translated into Latin by Robert of Chester (fl. 1150?) asLiber algebras et almucabola; shortly afterwards, Gerard of Cremona(1114–1187) retranslated it as De jebra et almucabola, “introducinginto Europe a science completely unknown till then, and with it, aterminology which was still capable of growth but already completelydeveloped. This discipline was called by the two technical terms whichappear in the titles of the first Latin translations, until the time whenCanacci (fourteenth century) began to use only the first one, algebra”(Vernet 1997, 1070). In this manner, the title of the young man’s bookinaugurated a new branch of science, algebra. This was, however, notthe only etymological contribution of this man; the Latinized versionof his own name, al-Khwarizmi, would introduce into Latin and laterinto English the word algorithm, which is in common use today incomputing science and mathematics. This singular distinction isperhaps consistent with al-Khwarizmi’s hope, for in the introductionof his book On Restoration and Balancing he had written,The learned of the times past and of nations which have ceasedto exist were constantly busy writing books on various branchesof science and knowledge, thinking of those who would comeafter them, hoping for a reward commensurate with theirabilities, trusting that their endeavor would be acknowledged…and relying on the purity of my intention and hoping that thelearned will reward it by asking for me in their supplications,the most excellence of the Divine mercy, in requital of whichmay the choicest blessings and the abundant bounties of Godbe theirs. (Khwarizmi 1989, 4)Al-Khwarizmi (b. ca. 780, d. after 847) had most probably cometo Baghdad from Khwarizm. His contributions to arithmetic, algebra,geography, and astronomy were to play an important role in thesubsequent development of these sciences, both in the Muslim worldas well as in Europe. His book on arithmetic, The Book of Additionand Subtraction by the Method of Calculations of the Hindus, introducedthe use of the Hindu numerals 1–9, the number zero, and theplace value system still in use today. Within a century of its writing,al-Khwarizmi’s work was used by Ahmad al-Uqlidisi (d. 980) for hisBook of Chapters, in which he invented decimal fractions. Later, thesetwo works were used by Yahya al-Maghribi (d. 1283) to find the

50 • The Making of Islamic Scienceroots of numbers and by Ghiyath al-Din Jamshid al-Kashi (d. 1429)to express the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its radius as6.28318530717955865, a result correct to sixteen decimal places(Berggren 1986, 7).Numbers we now use are made up of nine digits and zero—orsifr, an Arabic word from which the English word cipher is derivedthrough the French and Spanish; the word zero is also derived fromthe Arabic sifr via Italian, which received it through the middle Latinword zephirum. These numbers have come to us from the Hindus, butthey did not use this system to represent parts of the unit by decimalfractions, as that was an invention of Muslim mathematicians. Wedo not have al-Khwarizmi’s book on arithmetic, but another earlywork, Usul Hisab al-Hind (Principles of Hindu Reckoning), written some150 years after al-Khwarizmi’s treatise, gives us an insight into thehistory of the development of decimal arithmetic. This work of anaccomplished astronomer, Kushyar bin Labban (fl. ca. 1000), is in twosections and is supplemented by a chapter on the cube root. Kushyaruses a Babylonian system for fractions, a dust board for calculations,and dirhams as units of currency.Al-Khwarizmi was not alone in making original contributions tothe mathematical sciences; in the same century in which he lived, anumber of other scientists produced works on different branches ofmathematics. These include the famous philosopher al-Kindi (d. 873),his student Ahmad al-Sarakshi (fl. ninth century), al-Mahani (fl.ninth century), who was especially known for his study of Archimedes’problem, and the three sons of Shakir ibn Musa—Muhammad,Ahmad, and Hasan. During the next century, during which someof the most important and refined translations were made, Thabitibn Qurrah translated the Conics of Apollonius, many treatises ofArchimedes, and the Introduction to Arithmetic of Nicomachus.Like numbers, the decimal fractions we now use to representfractions is an original contribution of the Islamic scientific tradition.This is clear from The Book of Chapters on Hindu Arithmetic, writtenin Damascus in the years 952–953 by Abu’l Hasan al-Uqlidisi. Al-Uqlidisi introduced decimal fractions in the second part of his workin the section on doubling and halving numbers; while his use ofdecimal fractions was somewhat ad hoc, two centuries later Ibn Yahya

Facets of the Islam and Science Relationship • 51al-Maghribi al-Samawal (fl. twelfth century) introduced them withina theory of numbers, though still without naming the device. By theearly fifteenth century, decimal fractions had received both a nameand a systematic exposition, as we see in the work of Jamshid al-Kashi,an extraordinary mathematician and astronomer who later joinedthe team of astronomers and mathematicians that had gathered inStatue of al-Khwarizmi (ca. 847) in Samarqand,Uzbekistan. Al-Khwarizmi’s book al-Jabr wa’l Muqablainaugurated the science of algebra. He made many originalcontributions in geography, mathematics, and astronomy..

52 • The Making of Islamic ScienceSamarqand at the invitation of Ulugh Beg (d. 1449), the grandson ofTimur (d. 1405) (Berggren 1986, 36).No account of mathematics in Islamic civilization can be completewithout the mention of Omar Khayyam (1048–1131), most known inthe West for his Rubaiyat (Quatrains). Khayyam wrote an undiscoveredtreatise called Problems of Arithmetic (Mushkalat al-hisab), a key treatiseon cubic equations (the Risala), a lengthy commentary on Euclid,and many other works on astronomy, music, arithmetic, and algebra,in addition to his better-known poetic and philosophical works.Sometime after 1070 he became the head of the team of the mostdistinguished astronomers of the eleventh century, who compiledZij Malik-Shahi (Malik-Shah Astronomical Tables) at the observatory inIsfahan, a city where he spent the eighteen most peaceful years of hislife. The small portion of this work that has survived consists of tablesof ecliptic coordinates and of the magnitudes of the 100 brightestfixed stars. Around 1079 he proposed a reform for the calendar thenin use. According to his reform, “the average length of the year wasto be 365.2424 days (a deviation of 0.0002 day from the true solarcalendar), a difference of one day thus accumulating over a span of5,000 years. (In the Gregorian calendar, the average year is 365.2425days long, and the one-day difference is accumulated over 3,333years.)” (Youschkevitch and Rosenfeld 1980, 324).That Islam was instrumental in at least some of thesedevelopments can be seen from the fact that al-Khwarizmi devotedthe second half of his algebra to examples for calculating inheritance(for which the theoretical ratios are supplied by religious law) andzakah (the obligatory charity every Muslim gives from his wealthif it exceeds a certain amount). Both the division of inheritanceand the calculation of zakah can be a complicated affair, and thedevelopment of corresponding mathematical formulae requires a fullunderstanding of the religious laws involved. In addition, a great dealof applied mathematics was required to solve astronomical problemsassociated with other religious practices, as we shall discuss later inthis chapter. Similarly, mathematics was an indispensable tool insacred geography, as we have already seen.These are, however, only the most apparent dimensions of therelationship between Islam and mathematics. There is a much deeper

Facets of the Islam and Science Relationship • 53and foundational aspect to this relationship involving metaphysicalrealities expressed through numbers. Each number from zero to nine,in addition to its numeric character, also represents a geometricalfigure and, hence, a “personality.” Each letter of the Arabic languagewas also assigned a number, and a complete science (jafr) based onMausoleum of Omar Khayyam (1048–1131) in Neshapur,Iran. In addition to being a famous poet, Khayyamwas an accomplished mathematician and astronomer.In 1079, he proposed a reform for the calendar in use.The average length of the year in his new calendardeviated by 0.0002 day from the true solar year..

54 • The Making of Islamic Sciencethe numerical values of the letters emerged. This has numerousdimensions, ranging from mystical interpretations of the QurāĀn tothe tradition of writing verses from which the date of death of thedeceased can be calculated. Thus, numbers were not merely symbolsof quantities; through geometrical shapes on the one hand and thescience of jafr on the other, they represented numerous spiritual andaesthetic aspects of the created order.AstronomyTwo verses of the QurāĀn played a key role in establishing a nexusbetween astronomy and Islam. The first established the lunar year asconsisting of twelve months, four of which were specified as sacred (Q.9:32); the second (Q. 2:149–50) changed the direction of the qiblahfrom Jerusalem toward the Ka‘bah in Makkah, requiring Muslimsto face this direction for the ritual prayers and certain other acts ofworship. The QurāĀnic injunction to establish salah, the ritual prayers,at specific times also caused the development of a special branch ofreligious astronomy called ilm al-miqat, the science dealing with threedistinct aspects requiring astronomical solutions: the direction ofqiblah, the determination of the times for prayers, and the visibilityof the new moon. We have a precise definition of this science by afourteenth-century Egyptian scholar, Ibn al-Akfani, who was theauthor of an encyclopedia and several works on medicine. He states,The science of astronomical timekeeping is a branch ofknowledge for finding the hours of the day and night and theirlengths and the way in which they vary. Its use is in finding thetimes of prayer and in determining the direction in which oneshould pray, as well as in finding the ascendant and the rightand oblique ascensions from the fixed stars and the lunarmansions. This science is also concerned with shadow lengthsand the altitudes of celestial bodies, and with the orientation ofone city from another. (King 2004, 648)Initially approximate methods based on folk astronomy wereused to determine the direction and times of prayers. Thesemethods used astronomical phenomena visible to the naked eye,the direction of winds, the position of stars, and the like. But as

Facets of the Islam and Science Relationship • 55astronomical research progressed, more sophisticated methods cameinto existence. By the middle of the ninth century, sacred astronomyhad become fully established. Numerous scientists contributed to thedevelopment of this science. Among them, al-Khwarizmi (d. 847)and al-Battani (d. 929) hold special stature for proposing new tablesbased on the difference of longitudes between Makkah and a givenplace. Al-Battani’s description of astronomy provides an insight intothe high esteem in which this branch of science was held by Muslims.In the beginning of his Zij al-Sabihe describes astronomy with such phrases as ‘the most nobleof the sciences in rank’,’ elevated in dignity’, ‘illuminating tothe soul’, ‘pleasing to the heart’… ‘a field of endeavor withan invigorating effect on the intellect’ and ‘as sharpeningthe faculty of reflection’… field which makes possible theknowledge of the length of the year, the months, and differenttimes and seasons, the lengthening and shortening of dayand night, the positions of the sun and the moon as well astheir eclipses, and the courses of the planets in their directand retrograde motions, the alternations of their forms, andthe arrangement of their spheres; and he asserts that theselead people, who reflect deeply and persistently, to the proofof the unity of God and to the comprehension of His majesty,to His immense wisdom, infinite power, and to a grasp of theexcellence of His act. (Sayili 1960, 15–16)Further developments in this field were led by scientists such asHabash al-Hasib (d. 864), al-Nayrizi (d. 922), and Ibn al-Haytham(d. 1040). Al-Biruni (d. 1050) used spherical trigonometry to providesolutions. During the thirteenth century, new formulations appeareddue to the work of astronomers such as Abu Ali al-Marrakushi (fl.1281), whose method was probably used by the Damascene muwaqqital-Khalili (fl. 1365) to compute his extremely developed and accurateqiblah table (Samsó 2001).Research in astronomy as well as those disciplines of science thatwere required for astronomical research (mathematics, trigonometry,etc.) was directly related to Islam in that it was needed by thecommunity, but in addition to this utilitarian purpose astronomicalresearch was carried out for its own sake throughout the Muslimworld. A related development was the appearance of brass maps of

56 • The Making of Islamic Sciencethe world, with various localities placed on grids. This was an art thatrequired the knowledge of sophisticated mathematics and geometry.The discovery of two such world maps for finding the direction anddistance to Makkah has helped to push the date of the decline ofscience in Islamic civilization well beyond initial estimates. These twomaps are engraved on a circular plate and are believed to have beenmade in the middle of the second half of the seventeenth century(King 1999, 199).Astronomical time-keeping also led to the development of miqattables computed on the basis of the coordinates of a given locality.One of the earliest miqat tables is attributed to Ibn Yunus (d. 1009),whose work provided the basis of numerous subsequent tables thatwere used in Cairo until the nineteenth century (Samsó 2001, 212).By the middle of the twelfth century, most cities had official miqattables and, in certain big cities, a special official had been appointedfor this purpose. Ibn al-Shatir (d. 1375) is said to have held this officein Damascus. The third standard problem of miqat, the predictionof crescent visibility, which determined the beginning of a newIslamic month, received focused attention of Muslim astronomersthroughout the period under consideration and remains an areaof special interest even now. We have an inside narrative from oneof the most celebrated Muslim astronomers that testifies to theseabiding concerns of Islamic astronomy. This is in the form of a letterby Ghiyath al-Din Jamshid Mas‘ud al-Kashi to his father, written a fewweeks after his arrival in Samarqand to take part in the constructionof a new observatory. This letter, fortunately preserved for posterityby his father, is also an intimate source of rich details on the natureof science in the Islamic civilization in the fifteenth century—a timeonce considered to be barren!Al-Kashi begins his letter by thanking God for his many favorsand blessings, then apologizes to his father for not writing earlier.He speaks of his preoccupation with the observatory and tells himhow he had been received by Ulugh Beg, a ruler whom he describesas extremely well-educated in the QurāĀn, Arabic grammar, logic,and the mathematical sciences. He relates an anecdote about UlughBeg, that one day, while on horseback, he computed a solar positioncorrect to the minutes of an arc. He then tells his father that upon

Facets of the Islam and Science Relationship • 57Statue of Ulugh Beg (d. 1449),the ruler of Samarqand whobuilt one of the most importantscientific centers of the fifteenthcentury.his arrival he was put to test by more than sixty mathematicians andastronomers who were already working in Samarqand at the UlughBeg complex. He was asked to propose a method for determining theprojections of 1022 fixed stars on the rete of an astrolabe one cubit indiameter; to lay out the hour lines on an oblique wall for the shadowcast by a certain gnomon; to construct a hole in a wall to let in thesun’s light at, and only at, the time of the evening prayer; and to findthe radius, in degrees of an arc on the earth’s surface, of the truehorizon of a man whose height was three and a half cubits. All theseand other problems, which had baffled the entourage, al-Kashi tellshis father, were solved by him “without much difficulty, earning [him]respect and honor” (Kennedy 1960, 3–4).In addition to mathematical astronomy and the miqat tradition,Islamic astronomy has also left us a rich legacy of observatoriesand astronomical instruments. In fact, observatories, hospitals,madrassahs, and public libraries are four characteristic institutions ofIslamic civilization. The first observatory may have been constructed

58 • The Making of Islamic Scienceby Muslims during the Umayyad period (661–750). We have definiteinformation of a systematic program of astronomical observationsfrom the time of al-Ma’mun, who was the patron of this researchcarried out at the Shammasiyya quarter in Baghdad (in 828–829) andat the monastery of Dayr Murran on Mount Qasiyun in Damascus(831–832) (Sayili 1960, 50–56).The most advanced astronomical research in Islamic scientifictradition may have been carried out at Maragha in western Iranbetween the middle of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries—aperiod that has been called the “Golden Age” of Islamic astronomy(Saliba 1994, 252). The work of four astronomers—Mu’ayyad al-Dinal-Urdi (d. 1266), Nasir al-Din al-Tusi (d. 1274), Qutb al-Din al-Shirazi (d. 1311), and Ibn al-Shatir (d. 1375)—is particular important.They belong to what has been called the “Maragha school” (Roberts1966), and their work was in continuation of a tradition of criticismof Ptolemy that had begun as early as the eleventh century. The workof the Maragha School was revolutionary in the history of astronomy,and paved the way for a complete overhaul of Ptolemy’s model.Ptolemy had described the movements of the planets, including theSun and the Moon, on epicyclic spheres that were in turn carriedwithin the thickness of other spheres that he called deferents. Herepresented these spheres by circles. Ibn al-Haytham (d. 1048) andAbu Ubayd al-Juzjani (d. ca. 1070) noticed several contradictionsin Ptolemy’s model of the universe. Ibn al-Haytham noted in hislandmark work, al-Shukuk ala Batlamyus (Doubts Concerning Ptolemy),that one cannot assume there is a sphere within a physical universethat would move uniformly around an axis without passing throughits center (Saliba 1994, 251). He pointed out that the Ptolemaic equantwas in direct violation of this principle. Ibn al-Haytham concludedthat Ptolemy’s description could not be a true description of thephysical universe and hence should be abandoned for a better model.This tradition of critical examination of Ptolemaic modelcontinued in the western part of the Muslim world with importantcontributions made by Andalusian astronomers such as al-Bitruji (ca.1200), Ibn Rushd (d. 1198), and Jabir bin Aflah (ca. 1200). However,it was in Maragha that a revolutionary change took place: in 1957Victor Roberts showed that the lunar model of Ibn al-Shatir (d.

Facets of the Islam and Science Relationship • 591375) was essentially identical to that of Copernicus (1473–1543).Since then many other historians of science have conclusively shownthat Copernicus essentially used the work of Muslim astronomers,although the route of this transmission still remains unclear (Kennedy1983). “The question therefore is not whether, but when, where, andin what form he [Copernicus] learned of Maragha theory” (Saliba1994, 255). The work of these historians of science on the Maraghaschool has revolutionized our understanding of the nature of Islamicscientific tradition.In addition to its useful religious functions, astronomy also servedastrologers, who were generally condemned for their claim to havethe knowledge of future events. This claim was in contradiction tothe QurāĀnic teaching that only God has knowledge of the future (Q.27:64). The claims by astrologers, therefore, amounted to claiming ashare in God’s knowledge. In addition to the QurāĀn, many sayingsof the Prophet also condemned regarding the stars and theirmovements as sources of one’s fortunes or misfortunes, and these ledMuslim scholars to develop extensive criticism of astrology. DespiteThe madrassah of Ulugh Beg (d. 1449) in Samarqand, whereastronomers and mathematicians of the fifteenth century madesignificant discoveries.

60 • The Making of Islamic Scienceall this, astrology remained popular with rulers and the elite, andthis sometimes produced tensions that spilled over into the relatedarea of astronomy. This may have been the cause of the closing ofthe Istanbul observatory, but there were also other political motivesbehind that incident.Astronomical research required the use of certain instruments.Muslims had inherited some knowledge of instrument making fromPtolemy’s Almagest, but they invented many new instruments over thecourse of eight centuries, including observational instruments as wellas analog computers. Quadrants, altitude sextants, semicircular, rulerinstruments, and other observational tools were used to determinealtitudes and azimuths; armillary instruments were used formeasuring right ascensions and declinations and for longitudes andlatitudes with respect to the ecliptic. Sextants and bipartite arcs, as athird type of observational instrument, were used to determine theangular distances between celestial bodies. Various accounts of theseinstruments provide insights into their improvements. Al-Biruni’spreviously cited work, The Determination of the Coordinates, also providesinformation about developments in various instruments. The useof the mural quadrant, for instance, was an important developmentin practical astronomy, and its accuracy was not surpassed until theuse of optical instruments. The invention of the mural quadrant isgenerally attributed to Tycho Brahe and is named after him; recentscholarship has shown that the so-called Tycho’s Mural Quadrant (orTichonicus) was already in use in the Muslim world during the time ofNasir al-Din al-Tusi; Taqi al-Din’s observatory in Istanbul had a muralquadrant of a 6 m radius, whereas the radius of Tycho’s quadrant wasonly 194 cm (Dizer 2001, 248).Other instruments developed or improved upon by Muslimsinclude the armillary sphere, first described by Ptolemy butapparently never constructed until its use by Muslims. A variation onthis instrument constructed at the Maragha observatory had five ringsand an alidade instead of six rings. This increased the convenience ofuse without reducing accuracy.The most important analog computer used by Muslims wasthe astrolabe. Its origins are definitely pre-Islamic, but it receivedsustained and focused attention by Muslims, who perfected its useand made many improvements in its design. “The ability of Islamic

62 • The Making of Islamic ScienceAstrolabes were in use in the Muslim world as early as the timeof al-Fazari, who died in 777. By the end of the eighth century, themaking of astrolabes had become an important art in the Muslimworld. Among the famous early authors who wrote treatises on theastrolabe are al-Marwarrudhi and his student Ali bin Isa, nicknamedal-Asturlabi. Al-Khwarizmi has also left us a compendium ofnumerous problems to be worked out with the astrolabe and a treatiseon its construction (Dizer 2001, 257).The subsequent history of the astrolabe is a fascinating tale of thecoordination and merger of various Islamic arts and handcraft withthe practical needs of astronomy. Numerous sophisticated astrolabesmade of wood, brass, and other metals exist in various collectionsworldwide. Many await proper study (King 1999, 17).PhysicsIn general, physics remained entrenched in the Aristotelianframework throughout the eight hundred years of the Islamicscientific tradition. It was thus conceived as a branch of sciencedealing with change. Change was studied in the general Aristotelianframework of form and matter, potentiality and actuality, and thefour causes. This was the position of the Muslim Peripatetics, whofollowed Aristotle in their understanding of physics. They held adominant (though not exclusive) position in the study of change.The Peripatetics were however opposed by scientists,philosophers, and religious scholars, who challenged Aristotle’s views,though for different reasons. While independent scientists such asAbu Bakr Zakaria al-Razi and al-Biruni opposed their coreligionistPeripatetics on scientific and philosophical grounds, theologianssuch as Abu’l Barakat al-Baghdadi (d. 1023) and Fakhr al-Dinal-Razi (d. 1209) opposed Aristotelian views from a religious andphilosophical perspective and formulated a view of time, space, andcausality distinct from Aristotle’s. In this non-Aristotelian conceptionof nature one finds distinct Islamic characteristics, both in the wayin which the creation of things was perceived as well as in the waychange takes place. For instance, the theory of balance proposed byAbu’l-Fath Abd al-Rahman al-Khazini (fl. 1115–1130) in his major

Facets of the Islam and Science Relationship • 63The sextant of Ulugh Beg’sobservatory. The marblearc of about 600 m and aradius of about 40 m wasused to make observations.Astronomical researchcarried out at Ulugh Beg’sobservatory produced a starcatalog consisting of 1,018stars.treatise Kitab Mizan al-Hikma (The Book of the Balance of Wisdom) dealswith the concept of center of gravity in non-Aristotelian ways. He alsocontinues on the work on hydrostatics and mechanics by al-Biruni,al-Razi, and Omar Khayyam.This anti-Aristotelian current in Islamic philosophy and scienceproduced new ideas about time, space, and the nature of matter andlight, but tension between those who held to the Aristotelian viewof nature and those who were anti-Aristotelian cannot be regardedas a tension between “Islam” and “science,” as is sometimes stressedto emphasize the conflict model; rather, it is a tension mostlyconfined to the realm of philosophy, as it is mainly focused on thosephilosophical beliefs of Aristotle that opposed Islamic beliefs and hadno scientific basis.

64 • The Making of Islamic ScienceThe astrolabe was the most important astronomicalinstrument used by Muslim astronomers andmathematicians. Of pre-Islamic origins, the astrolabe wasgreatly improved by Muslims.These opposing currents appeared in Islamic tradition at thebeginning of the translation movement, in the middle of the eighthcentury, and became particularly strong in the middle of the eleventhcentury when almost the entire corpus of Greek philosophical andscientific works had been translated into Arabic.Other branches of physics—such as optics, mechanics, anddynamics—were included in the standard works of Muslim scientistsand philosophers, and though much of it remained Aristotelian in

Facets of the Islam and Science Relationship • 65outlook and basic doctrine, non-Aristotelian concepts of matter,space, time, and causality were also present.For example, the mutakallimun developed atomistic theorieswhere even time was atomic and where the only true causalityworked downward from God. And at the other extreme ofreligious respectability, al-Razi had an idea of absolute spacethat pushed towards the Newtonian view and was oppositeAristotle’s ‘place’-determining plenum. Certain epistemologicaland methodological issues were important concerns ofdynamics: the possibility and legitimacy of abstraction (toempty space, to forceless conditions), the possibility or reliabilityof mathematical treatment. (Hall 2001, 319–20)Geology and MineralogyGeology (as a science that deals with the dynamics and physicalhistory of the Earth, the rocks of which it is composed, and thephysical, chemical, and biological changes that the Earth hasundergone or is undergoing) was of special interest to Muslimscientists and philosophers of the medieval times for two reasons: (i) itwas a branch of science to which attention was directed by the QurāĀnitself and (ii) it was practically useful. What was observable on theEarth was a vast system of change over long periods of time, and thissystem was taken as a Sign of God. For Muslim scientists of the periodbetween the eighth and the sixteenth centuries, the Earth was createdby God for a fixed duration and for a definite purpose. It was a placeof wonders and of observations that led to an understanding of DivineWisdom, Power, and Mercy, with sustenance provided for every livingcreature on Earth. For these scientists, the QurāĀnic descriptionsof various processes such as the regeneration of water and of theEarth’s coming back to life after having been barren (Q. 36:23) wereobservable realities that directed human reflection to the Creator.They studied various geological processes (such as weathering,erosion, and transportation), the stratigraphic arrangement of strata,and long geological spans of time within the context of the QurāĀnicdescriptions of creation.The earth was considered to have a special position in theuniverse. Special attention was paid to the formation of rocks,

66 • The Making of Islamic Sciencemountains, the course of rivers, natural processes, minerals andlapidaries. Various stones and gems were studied for their medicinalproperties, and many stones and minerals were converted intodigestible form and were thus incorporated into the Islamicpharmacological tradition.Certain works by Muslim scientists of the period under considerationoffer remarkable examples of their observational abilities andformulation of geological theories. For example, al-Biruni has thefollowing statement in his Tahdid:We do not know of the conditions of creation, except what isobserved in its colossal and minute monuments which wereformed over long periods of time, for example, the highmountains which are composed of soft fragments of rocks,of different colors, combined with clay and sand which havesolidified over their surfaces. A thoughtful study of this matterwill reveal that the fragments and pebbles are stones whichwere torn from the mountains by internal splitting and byexternal collision. The stones then wear off by the continuousfriction of enormous quantities of water that run over them,and by the wind that blows over them. This wearing off takesplace, first, at the corners and edges, until they are rubbed offand the stones finally take an approximate spherical shape.As a contradistinction to the mountains, we have the minuteparticles of sand and earth. (al-Biruni, tr. 1967, 16)Al-Biruni has also left us a work on precious stones, The BookMost Comprehensive in Knowledge on Precious Stones, which combinesphilosophical insights, geological information, history, pharmacology,comments on various rulers, the habits of some nations, andnumerous other reflections in a compelling narrative. Al-Birunidescribes various precious stones, narrates events from his travels,quotes poets, story-tellers, and philosophers, all the while describingthe value or properties of precious stones and gems. He also givesscientific descriptions of the way certain precious stones are formed.In addition to al-Biruni, many other Muslim scientists, such as al-Kindi, Ibn Sina, al-Mas‘udi, and al-Idrisi have also left valuable workson geology and mineralogy. All of these works reflect a worldview

Facets of the Islam and Science Relationship • 67anchored in the QurāĀn and a belief system that takes the Earth as aSign of the Creator.Other Branches of ScienceIn addition to the already mentioned branches of science, there areothers—such as zoology, veterinary science, alchemy, and variousmedical sciences—that had numerous direct and indirect relationswith Islam. For instance, the QurāĀn mentions a number of animalsand birds by name and speaks of their benefits to humanity.Chapters 2 and 16 of the QurāĀn are named after the cow and thehoneybee, respectively. Horses are specifically mentioned in manyverses. The first five verses of the hundredth chapter, for instance,describe charging horses in magnificent rhythm. Eating meat ofcertain animals is considered unlawful in Islamic Law. Many plantsand fruits are also mentioned in the QurāĀn. These verses of theQurāĀn provided a certain theoretical framework for the cultivationof zoology, botany, and other related sciencesThe words and practices of the Prophet also formed the basis ofpractical psychology which was greatly advanced by Muslim scientistsand scholars. Practical psychology was also shaped by the QurāĀnicverses dealing with the relationship between human condition andthe Creator. Indeed, the hearts receive tranquility by the remembrance ofAllah, we are told in a verse (Q. 13:28). The Prophet recommendedspecific supplications to the sick. It was his practice to visit the old andthe sick and give them hope and joy. The verses of the QurāĀn andthe practice of the Prophet were used by Muslim scholars to developa comprehensive framework for the practice of sciences related tohealth, preventive medicine, and psychological well-being.Within the overall framework of Islamic medical sciences, thetradition of the “Prophetic Medicine” was obviously directly inspiredby the teachings and practices of the Prophet of Islam. Studies inthis particular branch of medicine were accompanied by an effortto preserve the exact words of the Prophet. His sayings dealingwith health, sickness, hygiene, and other issues related to medicinecontain specific references to diseases such as leprosy, pleurisy, andophthalmia. He recommended remedies such as cupping, cautery,

68 • The Making of Islamic Scienceand the use of honey and other natural substances. This body ofHadith on medical issues was systemized by religious scholars whowere often practicing physicians. Thus literature on Tibb al-Nabawi(the “Prophetic Medicine”) is a distinct genre in Islamic medicalsciences and there exist numerous works dealing with variousaspects of this tradition. One of the most celebrated works of thistype is the Tibb al-Nabawi of Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (d. 1350). In hisbook, Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya provides general principles of healthand sickness, reflects on the relationship between medicine andreligion, enumerates the sayings of the Prophet concerning medicineand discusses the role of Divine Revelation in medicine (Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya, tr. 1998). He also specifically mentions variousremedies recommended by the Prophet. Another related aspect ofthis tradition of Prophetic Medicine is the body of literature dealingwith pharmacological studies on various herbs and other naturalsubstances used or recommended by the Prophet. A whole branch ofscientific research has been inspired by the teachings of the Propheton the usage of these substances and these studies continue to thisday.In conclusion, it can be said with certainty that the enterpriseof science in Islamic civilization had numerous direct and indirectconnections with the Islamic worldview. In some branches of sciencethese connections were more obvious and identifiable; in others,Islam’s particular conception of nature played a more indirect role.The next chapter explores some of these connections.z

L4JThe Mosque, the Laboratory,and the Market(Eighth to the Sixteenth Century)Understanding the Islam and Science NexusOne’s understanding of the relationship between Islam andscience (or for that matter, any religion and science) depends onhow one defines the central purposes and the appropriate boundariesof science and/or religion. Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) and theextremely influential Protestant theologian Rudolph Bultmann(1884–1976), for example, insisted there could be no authenticinteractions between the two” (Olson 2004, 1). Since the times of Kantand Bultmann, numerous other influential philosophers and scientistshave reiterated the same opinion and, as Olson has noted, Bultmann’sposition has remained characteristic within the Christian tradition inthe West from the beginning of the Renaissance to the present. It isin this historical context that Galileo Galilei’s remark (borrowed fromCardinal Cesare Baronius) that “the Bible tells us how to go to heavenbut not how the heavens go” is extremely relevant (Olson 2004,2). One cannot, however, find a similar historical incident in therelationship between Islam and the scientific tradition that existed inIslamic civilization between the eighth and the sixteenth centuries.The relationship between science and Christianity has also beenredefined because of substantial changes to the role of religionin Western civilization since the Renaissance. A similar shift in theplace of religion has not occurred in the Muslim world. Even thevery definition of religion, as understood in contemporary Western

70 • The Making of Islamic Sciencecivilization, is substantially different from how it is understood in theMuslim world.As we begin an in-depth exploration of the Islam and sciencenexus, it is important to begin with Islam’s self-definition as a“religion” rather than to use definitions proposed by Westernthinkers such as Webster, who defines religion as “a set of beliefsconcerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especiallywhen considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies,usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and oftencontaining a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.”The Arabic word used for religion in the QurāĀn and in other Islamictexts is dîn (from the trilateral root D-Y-N), which is a comprehensiveterm with multiple layers of meaning, including “to obey,” “to besubservient to God,” “a way of life,” “Divine Law,” “a pattern,” and“Recompense.” Dîn, thus, is not merely a set of beliefs and associatedpractices, but a way of being, a path that a traveler takes with adefinite destination in mind. Moreover, it is a path that transformstravelers as they order their lives according to Divine guidance. Whilethere is of course a set of beliefs associated with Islam, these beliefsare not merely abstract ideas; they have been presented in concreteform through the “Way” (Sunnah) of the Prophet of Islam, whichconstitutes the real-life model for travelers on the dîn of Islam.We should also keep in mind that Islam’s self-definition is notlimited to the specific “religion” initiated by Muhammad in theseventh century; rather, the QurāĀn considers Islam to be that pathand way (dîn) that corresponds to, and is in harmony with, theinnate nature of all human beings, fitrah—the pattern on whichthey are created. And since this innate nature of human beings is anunchanging characteristic, their dîn too has remained unchangedsince the dawn of humanity. The QurāĀn states that all messengersof God have brought the same message to humanity. What has variedin different manifestations of this dîn has been merely outwardand secondary aspects: specific forms of worship, specific thingsand practices declared lawful and unlawful, specific rituals. Themessage given to Muhammad, according to the QurāĀn, completedthe cycle of revelation, confirming all previous revelations. “Religion”thus understood is not merely an inert set of beliefs and associated

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 71practices; rather, it is an ever-present consciousness in the deepestrecesses of a person. The aim of dîn is to reestablish “the bond—theligament between man and God which man lost at the Fall. Everyreligion is thus something like a rope thrown down from Heaven forfallen man to cling to” (Lings 2004, 1).Three essential elements of Islam can be summarized as follows:(i) belief in one God, the Creator, Originator, and Sustainer of allthings; (ii) belief in the veracity of all messengers appointed by Godto deliver His message; and (iii) belief in the eventual end of allthings, ushering in another kind of life in the Hereafter. These threecardinal elements of Islam, as primordial dîn, are denoted by threetechnical terms: Tawhid (Oneness of God), Risalah (Prophethood), andMa‘ad (Return). These are presented by the QurāĀn in various waysand are supported through numerous demonstrational proofs fromthree realms: the cosmos, human history, and the human soul (nafs).Understood in the QurāĀnic terms, religion refers to an existentialreality permeating every existing being—from mighty mountains totiny ants crawling in the vast desert. All that is in the heavens and theearth extols Allah, the Mighty, the Wise, as the QurāĀn declares in its owncharacteristic manner (Q. 57:1).This specific understanding of “religion” demands that thequestions related to the Islam and science nexus be formulatedaccording to Islam’s self-definition. To be sure, there will be someoverlap between these questions and those normally used to explorethe relationship between science and Christianity (or, for thatmatter, any religion), but this overlap is a secondary, not essential,characteristic of this discourse.The religion and science discourse in Christianity has alsofound common ground in the two Books of God—scripture andnature—on the basis of autobiographical anecdotes of scientistswho have incorporated knowledge, methods, concepts, and ideasfrom scripture into their scientific works. This discourse thus takesthe personal beliefs of a Newton (1642–1727), Boyle (1627–1691), orEinstein (1879–1955) to be indicative of porous boundaries betweenscience and religion (Olson 2004, 3). This is used to build the case fortheir interaction. This argument can obviously be applied with muchmore emphasis to Islam and science, because, compared to the post–

72 • The Making of Islamic Scienceseventeenth century era, scientists who made the Islamic scientifictradition possible during the eighth and the sixteenth centuries weremore frequently also the authors of religious texts of an advancednature. This argument, however, has little relevance, because—asopposed to the post-Renaissance scientists noted earlier—the Muslimscientists of the pre-seventeenth century era did not see their religionand their science as two separate entities.Another problematic argument stemming from theuniversalization of the specific interaction between WesternChristianity and science relates to the notion that religious ritualsand celebrations related to the calendar are a “reason” for scienceand religion to interact, as science and scientists help religiousinstitutions and authorities to prepare for these rituals andcelebrations by furnishing required astronomical information. Theneed to determine the spring equinox for Easter, for instance, isconsidered a religious need that is fulfilled by science, and hencereligion is shown to have an intrinsic need to support scientificresearch for its own needs (Olson 2004, 3). This argument can besuperficially applied to Islam (as is often the case) with much moreforce, because in the case of Islam, not only is the annual cycle ofrituals and celebrations dependent on astronomically determinedtimes but also daily practices, such as the five obligatory prayersand fasting. These obligations are called “religious obligations”in a framework in which some obligations are “religious” andothers are “nonreligious.” Because, however, Islam considers itselfa complete way of life (al-dîn) encompassing the entire spectrum ofhuman activities—making even the most ordinary act of removing aharmful thing from the road a “religious” act—these categories andthe arguments associated with them become superfluous. What isperceived as the “need of religion” being “fulfilled by science” is thusa conception foreign to Islam, which naturally perceives the needsof humanity in terms of its obligations towards the Creator, and sodefines a way of life for individuals and communities in which allneeds are (what would be considered) religious.In spite of these differences between the cases of Christianityand Islam, the aforementioned conceptual categories of religion andscience discourse have been applied often and variously to Islam.

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 73This has produced a body of literature that attempts to show thatwhile Christianity eventually accepted and even supported the newscientific knowledge that emerged in Europe in the seventeenthcentury, along with the institutional structures needed to establishscience on a solid footing, Islam did not; hence its failure to producea Scientific Revolution parallel to that of Europe (Huff 1995).Furthermore, it is argued that this reveals something inherentlywrong with Islam in this regard—that it abhors innovation, freethinking, and objective inquiry, which are all considered necessarypreconditions for science. These studies then attempt to show thatsince science is produced through innovation and freethinking, andsince in Islam “the idea of innovation in general implied impietyif not outright heresy” (Huff 1995, 234), science could not find ahome in Islam. Faced with historical evidence of the existence of aneight-hundred-year-long tradition of scientific research in Islamiccivilization, these studies then consider it an anomalistic case of thesurvival of “foreign” (sometimes called “ancient”) sciences not becauseof but despite Islam.This “Islam versus foreign sciences” thesis was first propoundedby the Hungarian Orientalist Ignaz Goldziher (1850–1921) in hispaper entitled “The Attitude of Orthodox Islam Toward the ‘AncientSciences’” (Goldziher 1915), and it has since become a favorite pointof departure for building a “conflict model” for Islam and science a laAuguste Comte and a host of other philosophers, including those whoconceive religion and science as nonoverlapping domains.Islam and Science: Aspects of their RelationshipUsing the conceptual categories inherent in Islamic understandingof knowledge—whether scientific or otherwise—we can reformulatethe question of the Islam and science nexus. Knowledge is ilm inArabic, a word that frequently occurs in the QurāĀn. Knowledge isconsidered meritorious; those who know and those who do not know arenot equal, a verse of the QurāĀn tells us (Q. 39:9). The Prophet ofIslam said that “scholars are the inheritors of the Prophets.” He alsoadvised Muslims to “seek knowledge from the cradle to the grave.”The acquisition of knowledge is virtuous; it ennobles humanity and

74 • The Making of Islamic Scienceit serves its needs. In the case of individuals, a certain amount ofknowledge of Islam is deemed essential; for a community, knowledgeof various sciences is essential for fulfilling the practical needs ofthe community. This recognition has produced two categories ofobligations: personal and communal. It is the personal obligation(fard ‘ayn) of a believer to have a certain amount of knowledge ofhis or her dîn, but it is not everyone’s obligation to have expertisein astronomy or mathematics; this is instead the obligation of acommunity, if the need exists. Thus defined, scientific knowledge,whether furthering our understanding of the cosmos and its workingor merely fulfilling the practical needs of the community, becomesa “religious” duty incumbent on the whole community, meaningthereby that a certain number of individuals from the communitymust pursue it with the full financial, logistic, and moral support ofthe entire community. It is this religious obligation that provides anexus between Islam and the quest for scientific knowledge.The conceptual scheme for the “interaction of science andreligion” that emerges from this primary understanding of the natureand function of knowledge removes the duality inherent in the twoentitymodel, and allows us to understand the scientific endeavors ofMuslim scientists and scholars of the classical period on their ownterms. “I confined this book,” wrote al-Khwarizmi in the introductionto his Algebra, “to what men constantly need to calculate theirinheritance and legacies, [their] portions and judgments, in theirtrade and in all their dealings with one another [in matters involving]measurement of land, the digging of canals, and geometrical[calculations], and other matters involving their crafts” (Khwarizmi,tr. 1989, 4). In writing his book, which would inaugurate the scienceof algebra, al-Khwarizmi was fulfilling a fard ‘ayn, for which (he wrote)he hoped to receive recompense from the Creator.It can be argued that perhaps not all Muslim scientists saw theirscientific research in this manner; that they were interested in sciencefor its own sake, or that they were merely pursuing a career, providingbread and butter for their families. While these arguments hold someweight, and while it may even be shown that some Muslim scientistsof the period under consideration had no or very little commitmentto Islam, these and similar arguments do not render invalid the

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 75aforementioned Islamic conceptual framework of knowledge and itspursuit. The two categories mentioned above (personal obligations,fard ‘ayn, and communal obligations, fard kifâya) are Islamic legalterms deeply entrenched in Islamic beliefs and practices.It is essential to reformulate the questions related to therelationship between Islam and the Islamic scientific tradition interms that do not impose foreign conceptual categories. Science isa civilizational activity; it fulfills the needs of a given civilization byproviding reliable and verifiable knowledge about the physical world.It is pursued by men and women whose understanding of the physicalworld they explore is directly related to their belief system andworldview. The way a scientist understands the origin and working ofthe physical world is extremely important to his or her approach toit. It is this understanding of the origin and working of the physicalworld that forms the matrix from which emerges the relationshipbetween the scientist and science as well as between the scientist andhis or her way of being (dîn).Seen in this way, the Islam and science nexus becomes a set ofinherent and organic relationships between science, scientists, andtheir beliefs and practices. In a way, it is the nexus between whatan individual perceives as his or her personal obligation (fard ‘ayn)and his or her role in fulfilling a communal obligation (fard kifâya).This does not suggest by any means that there were no tensions orconflicts within the Islamic scientific tradition. All that is beingsuggested is that Islam views all knowledge—whether scientificor otherwise—through its own unique perspective in which thereis a certain unity of knowledge, a certain direction, and a certainpurpose. The methodology being proposed here explores the Islamand science nexus as a set of dynamic relationships that arose out ofthe particular Islamic concept of knowledge (in this case, scientificknowledge) and its function, the needs of the community, the role ofindividual scientists who deemed it their duty to fulfill these needs,and the natural instinct to acquire knowledge, which has always beenthe main driving force for exploring the world of nature. As al-Birunitells us,I say, further, that man’s instinct for knowledge has constantlyurged him to probe the secrets of the unknown, and to explorein advance what his future conditions may be, so that he can

76 • The Making of Islamic Sciencetake the necessary precautions to ward off with fortitude thedangers and mishaps that may beset him. (Al-Biruni, tr. 1967,5)A possible rebuttal to this methodology would be the presenceof non-Muslim scientists and scholars within this scientific tradition.It is true that many non-Muslims participated in the making ofthe Islamic scientific tradition, especially in its early phase, but oncloser examination it becomes obvious that the scientific enterprisecultivated in the Islamic civilization cannot be divided into Muslimand non-Muslim categories; it was a tradition that explored the worldof nature from within the overall worldview provided by Islam and, assuch, even non-Muslim scientists and translators who participated inthis enterprise worked within that overall framework. This should notseem odd. After all, the thousands of Muslim scientists now workingin the modern enterprise of science built upon a worldview other thanthat of Islam have not made this enterprise “Islamic.”A final point on methodology pertains to the role of revelationin Islam. The Islamic concept of knowledge is ultimately linked torevelation, which is considered the only absolutely real and true sourceof knowledge. In our context, this is to be understood in the sensethat whatever knowledge one gleans from or of the physical world byone’s external physical senses (touch, smell, taste, sight, and hearing,or by scientific instruments that are extensions of these senses), mustbe processed in the light of revealed knowledge. Revealed knowledgeoutlines a certain order of things and their relations. Knowledgederived from senses or their extensions is examined in the light ofthis order. A star or a moon does not exist by itself, or for itself; itexists within a vast universe populated by numerous other thingsand, as such, in addition to its own existence as a thing, it has anexistence in relation to other things. This relational existence providesthe framework in which its own existence is examined. The eveningstar that rises over Samarqand at a certain place and time duringthe summer months has its own existence, but an al-Biruni or anal-Khwarizmi studying its rising and setting by making observationsis using this data for constructing a model of the universe in whichthe evening star is but one entity. This model of the universe has,broadly speaking, an Islamic framework, and the integration of the

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 77scientific data on this star into the greater universe is what is meantby “processing” the data in the light of revelation. The scientist isalso making these observations and measurements for a purposeother than, and in addition to, advancing knowledge about theevening star; he is a human being existing within a society that hascertain needs that he, by dint of his education, training, resources,and personal preferences, has taken upon himself to fulfill, hopingthat “the learned would reward [his] endeavor,” as al-Khwarizmi said,“obtaining for [him] through their prayers the excellence of DivineMercy” (al-Khwarizmi 1989, 66).Basic Elements of Islam and Science NexusContemporary religion and science discourse is broadly concernedwith three basic themes:Consonance, Dissonance, Neutrality: Is a certain religioustradition supportive of science? Does it oppose it? Is it neutral? Whathas historically been the nature of this relationship?Origins: In what ways does a given religion understand thenature of cosmological and biological origins? How does thisunderstanding produce consonance and/or dissonance with scientificperspectives on origins?Moral and Ethical Issues: (i) those dealing with the impact ofmodern science and technologies on the planet, its resources, andthe environment; and (ii) certain new issues that have arisen due tothe development of new technologies, especially in the biomedicalsciences, including those arising out of technologically assistedparenthood, surrogate motherhood, and genetics.The first set of questions which arises out of this two-entitymodel has already been discussed in the Preface of this book. Sincethe two-entity model is inapplicable to Islam and science (as statedin the Introduction), there is little to discuss under this heading. Yet,since a large number of secondary works have consistently advocatedthe “Islam against science” doctrine, it is necessary to clear somebasic misconceptions. The question on origins has two aspects:cosmological origins and biological origins; the latter includes thetheory of evolution proposed by Darwin and its variations proposed

78 • The Making of Islamic Scienceby his successors. In this chapter we only discuss cosmological origins;the question of biological origins is discussed in Chapter 7.Since in this chapter we only explore the nexus between Islamand science during the eighth to the sixteenth centuries, the thirdset of issues is irrelevant here, for these technologies did not existduring that time. We will, however, discuss these while dealing withthe relationship between Islam and modern science.Storm in a Cup of Tea: Islam Against Science or Islam forScience?As far as science is concerned, Islam is definitely a hurdle in itspropagation; it can be said that there is something inherently wrongwith Islam that does not allow science to flourish. This is why, inspite of the enormous oil wealth available in the Middle East, noMuslim country is producing science today. Historically speaking, itis true that a large part of Greek scientific texts was translated intoArabic and made available to Muslims, but even this did not produceany original science, and certainly not the kind that emerged inEurope at the time of Scientific Revolution. It appears that Greekscience survived in the Islamic civilization not because of Islam,but despite it. Treated as “foreign sciences,” the Greek heritage wasalways looked upon by Muslim religious authorities with suspicionand hostility and as soon as they could, they destroyed it. Al-Ghazali(d. 1111) was the man most responsible for this. Despite this, a fewbrilliant philosopher-scientists and physicians need to be mentioned,for, in spite of vigorous opposition, they left behind a small body ofwork—mainly commentaries on Aristotle’s natural philosophy—thathad a significant impact on Western thought when it was translatedinto Latin. Among these philosopher-scientists, al-Kindi, al-Farabi (d.ca. 950), Ibn Sina, Ibn Bajja (d. 1139), and Ibn Rushd are noteworthy.This is how a very large number of general books on science andreligion, as well as those dealing with the history of science, depictthe eight hundred years of scientific activity in Islamic civilization.Most accounts actually reduce this time period to half its length bya summary death sentence, which turns this tradition to an inertmass some time in the twelfth century. This is the prevalent view of

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 79Ibn Sina’s tomb in Hamadan, Iran. Ibn Sina’s influenceremained strong in the Muslim world as well as in theWest for many centuries.

80 • The Making of Islamic Sciencenonspecialists, who have never touched a real manuscript with theirhands and who have never looked at an Islamic scientific instrumentof surpassing aesthetic quality and dazzling details displaying amastery of complex mathematical theorems. The extent of theentrenchment of this view makes it almost an obligation of anyonewriting a new work on Islam and science to first examine evidencesupporting this view. When one makes that attempt one finds thatall roads lead to Ignaz Goldziher, the godfather of the “Islam versusforeign sciences” doctrine, who first enshrined it in a German papercalled “Stellung der alten islamischen Orthodoxie zu den antikenWissenschaften” (Goldziher 1916). It was translated into English in1981 by Merlin Swartz under an inaccurate title, “The Attitude ofOrthodox Islam Toward the ‘Ancient Sciences’” (Swartz 1981). TheEnglish title is misleading, as Dimitri Gutas has pointed out, because“it omits the word ‘old’ (‘alte’) from the original title, eliminating eventhis minimal differentiation among the various epochs of Islamichistory…omitting the word ‘old’ in the English context makes all‘orthodox Islam’ appear opposed to the study of the ancient sciences”(Gutas 1998, 168).Among the 155 references cited by Goldziher, however, there isnot a single reference to a scientist complaining about the “oppositionof Islamic orthodoxy” to his work a la Galileo. This glaring absenceof internal evidence has never been mentioned by any critique ofGoldziher’s position, although there exist at least four importantcriticisms that have somewhat blunted its influence in recent years(Sabra 1987, Makdisi 1991, Berggren 1996, Gutas 1998).What is fundamentally problematic in Goldziher’s constructionis his conception of “orthodoxy” in Islam, as George Makdisi haspointed out:The use of the term “orthodoxy” implies the possibility ofdistinguishing between what is true and what is false. This termimplies the existence of an absolute norm as well as an authoritywhich has the power to excommunicate those whose doctrinesare found to be false or heretical. Such an authority exists inChristianity, in its councils and synods. It does not exist inIslam. (Makdisi 1981, 251)

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 81By positing his “old orthodoxy” against science, Goldziher wantedto contrast it “to some ‘new’ orthodoxy, and this is identified as Islamin Goldziher’s day, which he mentions in the very last sentence [of hispaper]” (Gutas 1998): “Orthodox Islam in its modern developmentoffers no opposition to the study of the ancient sciences, nor doesit see an antithesis between itself and them” (Goldziher 1916, tr.Swartz 1981, 209). Gutas has noted that this “statement points to thesource of Glodziher’s rationalistic and even political bias” and he hassuggested that Goldziher’s hypothesis should be seen in the light ofhis well-known anti-Hanbali bias.Goldziher’s attitude toward Islam was formulated in thebackground of the colonization of the Muslim world by Europeanpowers that had, in turn, presented Islam as a spent force that couldonly be derided and vilified. This bias against Islam, which hadpenetrated all spheres of thought and imagination of European lifein the nineteenth century, must have contributed a great deal to themaking of Goldziher’s intellectual position toward Islam. He was adirect heir to the medieval history of hostility toward Islam. Islamwas then studied in Europe not as a true religion but as an inventionof Muhammad: many works included in their titles the termMuhammadanism, which Goldziher used in the title of his major workMuhammedenische studien (1888).The European attitude toward Islamic science during Goldziher’stime can also be judged from an interesting encounter betweenJamal al-Din al-Afghani (1838/9-1897) and Ernest Renan (1823-92), the French philologist, historian, and critic. The details of thisencounter also show us the complex psychological makeup of Muslimintellectuals in that fateful century during which the Europeanpowers colonized almost the entire Muslim world. They also revealcertain aspects of changes in the European outlook on religion andEuropean understanding of the relationship between religion andscience at that time.Religion was then seen as an inhibitor of science. This was firstseen in reference to Christianity, but soon this initial recastingof the role of Christianity in Europe was enlarged to include allreligions, Islam being particularly chosen for its perceived hostilitytoward rational inquiry. The idea that Islam was inherently against

82 • The Making of Islamic Sciencescience was thus nourished under specific intellectual circumstancesthen prevalent in Europe, and it was in this general intellectualbackground that the first echoes of the “Islam against science”doctrine are heard.The encounter between al-Afghani and Renan was based ona public lecture on “Islam and Science” delivered by Renan at theSorbonne; it was later published in the Journal des Débats on March29, 1883. In his lecture, Renan forcefully repeated the claim (alreadyin the air at that time) that early Islam and the Arabs who professedit were hostile to the scientific and philosophic spirit, and that scienceand philosophy had entered the Islamic world only from non-Arabsources (Keddie 1972, 189). Al-Afghani, who happened to be in Parisat that time, responded to Renan. His response was published in thesame journal on May 18, 1883. In his response, al-Afghani askedrhetorically: “How does the Muslim religion differ on this point fromother religions? All religions are intolerant, each in its own way”(Keddie 1968, 182–83). He goes on to accept Renan’s hypothesis, butonly in general terms:Whenever the religion will have an upper hand, it will eliminatephilosophy; and the contrary happens when it is philosophy thatreigns as sovereign mistress. So long as humanity exists, thestruggle will not cease between dogma and free investigation,between religion and philosophy; a desperate struggle in which,I fear, the triumph will not be for free thought, because themasses dislike reason, and its teachings are only understoodby some intelligences of the elite, and because, also, science,however beautiful it is, does not completely satisfy humanity,which thirsts for the ideal and which likes to exist in dark anddistant regions that the philosophers and scholars can neitherperceive nor explore. (Keddie 1968, 187)Renan’s condescending rejoinder to al-Afghani, published in theJournal des Débats on May 19, 1883, stated that “there was nothingmore instructive than studying the ideas of an enlightened Asiaticin their original and sincere form” (Keddie 1972, 196). He found inthem a rationalism that gave him hope that “if religions divide men,Reason brings them together; and there is only one Reason.” He thenreiterated his racialist views, even in praising al-Afghani: “Sheikh

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 83Jemmal-Eddin is an Afghan entirely divorced from the prejudicesof Islam; he belongs to those energetic races of Iran, near India,where the Aryan spirit lives still energetically under the superficiallayer of official Islam.” Renan admits “he may have appeared unjustto the Sheikh” in singling out Islam for his attack: “Christianity inthis respect is not superior to Islam. This is beyond doubt. Galileowas no better treated by Catholicism than Averroes by Islam.” Renanconcludes his rejoinder by stating that al-Afghani had “broughtconsiderable arguments for his fundamental theses: during the firsthalf of its existence Islam did not stop the scientific movement fromexisting in Muslim lands; in the second half, it stifled in its breast thescientific movement, and that to its grief” (Keddie 1972, 197).This is the immediate background to twentieth-century Westernliterature on Islam and science. Renan was pushed out of the picture,but Goldziher still reigned supreme in this discourse, which construesIslam inherently incapable of producing science. The fatal division onwhich Goldziher construed his thesis divides knowledge into ‘sciencesof the ancients’ (meaning all works translated from Greek) and ‘thesciences of the Arabs’ or the ‘new sciences’. By ancient sciences hemeans “the entire range of propaedeutical, physical and metaphysicalsciences of the Greek encyclopedia, as well as the branches ofmathematics, philosophy, natural science, medicine, astronomy,the theory of music and others” (Goldziher 1916, 185), although heacknowledges the extensive interest “that these sciences aroused fromthe second century AH on[ward] in religious circles loyal to Islam(and encouraged also by the Abbasid caliphs).” He states that “strictorthodoxy always looked with some mistrust on those who wouldabandon the science of Shafi and Malik, and elevate the opinion ofEmpedocles to the level of law in Islam” (Goldziher 1916, 185–86).Thus the entire range of Greek, Persian, Hindu, and other pre-Islamic works are pitted against “pure Islamic sciences.” This positionhas been previously examined in detail, and hence a quote here fromthat work will suffice:But when one examines the data used by Goldziher toconstruct his battle lines, one realizes that these battle linesare boundaries drawn on sand with a clear and pre-conceivedpurpose which is none other than a specific interpretation of

84 • The Making of Islamic Sciencethe whole intellectual tradition of Islam. In order to supporthis various claims, Goldziher had to rely on exceptions, ratherthan norms, and on fatal distortions of the data by situatingthe quoted passages in his context, rather than in their properhistorical context. For example, he states, as proof for hisassertion, that “the pious Muslim was expected to avoid thesesciences with great care because they were dangerous to hisfaith”, because the Prophet had prayed to God for protectionagainst a ‘useless science’. Goldziher states that this hadithof the Prophet “was quoted frequently”. In the footnote tothis statement, where one would expect to find referencesto the ‘frequent quotations’, one finds only a note statingthat the hadith is to be found in Muslim (V, 307) and not inBukhari, but that “it appears with special force in the Musnadof Ahmad, VI, p. 318”. What does it mean for a tradition of theProphet to appear in the Musnad of Ahmad with special force?The Musnad of Ahmad, like all such works, is a collection ofsayings and description of various acts of the Prophet of Islam,arranged according to the narrator, systematically and in auniform manner without any special treatment reserved forone hadith and withheld from another.… Furthermore, inthe text of the hadith, the word used is ‘ilm, which does notmean sciences of the type Goldziher is referring to; ‘ilm meansknowledge in general and taken within the context of theProphetic supplications, it is extremely unlikely that he wouldbe referring to the “foreign sciences.” (Iqbal 2002, 78)Internal EvidenceFrom the foregoing it should be apparent that the three possibilitiesnormally explored in contemporary religion and science discourse(consonance, dissonance, neutrality) are inapplicable to the case ofthe Islam and science nexus for the period under discussion. We havea very large number of practicing scientists who are also religiousscholars, or have enough grounding in religious sciences to know whatwas permissible under the Law and what was not. An Ibn Sina, anal-Biruni, or an Ibn Rushd could, therefore, easily challenge any halftrainedMulla who might object to their science on religious grounds.The tone of authority and confidence displayed by these scientists

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 85when writing about the religious basis of their science provides aninternal evidence against any “Islam against science” doctrine thatattempts to show that religious orthodoxy had an upper hand in suchmatters. This is clearly not the case, as evident from what al-Biruniwrote in the introduction to his treatise on the shadows:I say firstly, that the subject of this investigation can hardlybe comprehended except after encompassing (knowledge of)the constitution of the universe according to what is shown bydemonstration, excluding what the various groups of peopleapply to it of what they have heard from their ancestors, aswell as recourse from the sects to their beliefs, and (also) after(attaining) the capability of dealing with its varying situations,in which one cannot dispense with arithmetic and deepinvestigation of it by geometry.Verily, (even) he who has studied much in the sacred books maynot be separated from the mass of the common people, norfrom their conviction that this art is contradictory to religion,contrary to divine (Muslim) law; that it is a forbidden pursuit,and an abrogated and forsaken practise. Nothing impels him tothis belief but his ignorance of what impugns religion so that hemight (properly) support it, his revulsion from the unfamiliarwhich he inherits from [his likes] before him, and his inabilityto distinguish what is (truly impugning to religion) from what isnot. (Al-Biruni, tr. 1976, 6)It is, thus, safe to say that no so-called Islamic orthodoxy couldhave opposed the practice of science by scientists who were themselveseminently qualified to discern what was their religion’s position onvarious aspects of their chosen fields of research. Not only were manyMuslim scientists of the period deeply rooted in the religious tradition,they were qualified enough to write books on the same “Islamicsciences” that Goldziherism poses against their natural science.Some contemporary projections of “Islam against science”doctrine confound the issues entirely: philosophy is linked to naturalphilosophy and religion to theology and then, in one sentence, allof these distinct fields of study are uniformly applied to provide“examples” of Islam’s opposition to science. Most of these accountsare by authors who base their opinions on questionable translations

86 • The Making of Islamic Scienceand secondary sources that repeat a stock account first formulated inthe nineteenth century. These works display little understanding ofthe specific nature of Islamic philosophy (falsafah), which had variousstrands quite distinct from Greek philosophy, including the profoundtradition of hikmah (wisdom) philosophy discussed in more detail inthe following section. Another practice in these confused accounts isto use debates internal to the religious sciences—such as debates onthe role of reason in interpretation of revealed knowledge—to builda case for the “Islam against science” doctrine. These debates areoften taken out of their proper context, and their carefully chosenterminology (specific to the disciplines in which these debates fall) isdisregarded. As an example we will discuss a single case of this type.“Persecution and harassment of those who advocated the use ofreason to explicate revelation are unknown in the medieval LatinWest after the mid-twelfth century,” we read in one such work.How different it was in Islam, if we judge by a question thatIbn Rushd (Averroes) posed in the twelfth century in histreatise On the Harmony of Religion and Philosophy. In thistreatise, Ibn Rushd sought to determine “whether the studyof philosophy and logic is allowed by the [Islamic] Law, orprohibited, or commended—either by way of recommendationor as obligatory” (Averoes 1976, 44). In the thirteenth century,Ibn as-Salah ash-Shahrazuri, an expert on the tradition ofIslam…issued a written reply (fatwa) to a question that asked,in Ignaz Goldziher’s words, “whether, from the point of viewof religious law, it was permissible to study or teach philosophyand logic and further, whether it was permissible to employ theterminology of logic in the elaboration of religious law, andwhether political authorities ought to move against a publicteacher who used his position to discourse on philosophy andwrite about it” (Goldziher 1981, 205).What is remarkable in all this is the fact that, in the twelfthcentury, Ibn Rushd and, in the thirteenth century, Ibn as-Salah were grappling with the question of whether, fromthe standpoint of the religious law, it was legitimate to studyscience, logic, and natural philosophy, even though thesedisciplines had been readily available in Islam since the ninth

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 87century. Ibn Rushd felt compelled to justify their study, whileIbn as-Salah, astonishingly, denied their legitimacy (as wesaw earlier in the chapter). I know of no analogous discussionin the late Latin Middle Ages in which any natural philosopher ortheologian felt compelled to determine whether the Bible permitted thestudy of secular subjects. It was simply assumed that it did. (Grant2004, 241–42, emphasis added)Disregarding the presence of Goldziher, two noteworthyaspects of this passage are (i) the author’s unstated aim to present acomparison between Christianity and Islam (the italicized portionof the quotation) in which he attempts to show two highly respectedMuslim scholars (Ibn Rushd and Ibn as-Salah) mired in debate on anissue that had long been resolved in Christianity and (ii) his lack ofunderstanding of the technical terms used in the original texts. IbnRushd’s celebrated treatise, Kitâb fašl li’l-maqâl wa taqrîr mâ bayna alsharî‘ahwa’l hikmah min’l ittišâl, mistranslated as On the Harmony ofReligion and Philosophy, has nothing to do with science and religiondebates whatsoever. Grant is apparently using George Hourani’sEnglish translation (listed in his bibliography), and not the originalArabic, but even this problematic translation with an incorrect titleclearly indicates that the subject of the treatise is to determine, froman Islamic legal perspective, the nature, limits, and conditions ofthe use of falsafah (philosophy) and mantiq (logic). Ibn Rushd, let usrecall, was born into a family of distinguished scholars and juristswho had held the office of Grand Qâdi (Judge) for two generationsbefore his birth; he himself was to become the preeminent GrandQâdi (Judge) of Cordoba and was duly trained in sharî‘ah (IslamicLaw) as well as all branches of Islamic learning of the time, includingjurisprudence (fiqh), medicine, and falsafah. His works include bookson a wide range of topics, including philosophy, medicine, IslamicLaw, astronomy, and music. The purpose of this particular book,whose Arabic title can be translated as A Decisive Book and Commentaryon What Is Common in Islamic Law and Wisdom, is to ascertain, asIbn Rushd himself tells us, “from an Islamic Legal point of view(ala jahtan nazar al-shari‘) the position of falsafah (philosophy) andmantiq (logic), whether they as branches of knowledge (‘ulum) arepraiseworthy (mubah), prohibited (mahzur), or commanded (ma’mur)”

88 • The Making of Islamic Science(Ibn Rushd 1959, 1). To paraphrase it as “grappling with the questionof whether, from the standpoint of the religious law, it was legitimateto study science, logic, and natural philosophy” is to read one’s ownpredetermined agenda into a medieval text that was concerned withcategories strictly used in Islamic jurisprudence (mubah, mahzur,ma’mur, mandub, and wajib), categories that cannot be transplantedfrom their field without doing them gross injustice. Most important,there is no mention of science in the original text! Of course, one canstretch the argument to say that logic is a necessary prerequisite forscientific investigation, but we must remember we are dealing witha medieval text on Islamic Law. At the time Ibn Rushd wrote histreatise, science had been practiced in Islamic civilization for almostfour centuries and various branches of science were well-known bytheir own names (astronomy, alchemy, geography, etc). Ibn Rushd’streatise certainly does not refer to those sciences.The very pointed indicator to the subject matter of The DecisiveTreatise (Fasl al-maqal) is included in its full title: ittišal, from the rootw-š-l, meaning junction and parentage. The purpose of the book hasbeen clearly elucidated by Roger Arnaldez as follows:What “parentage” (ittisal) is there between Islamic religious law(shariah) and wisdom (hikma)? That is the question discussed inThe Decisive Treatise. Let us note the expressions used. Averroesis not speaking about the relationship between faith and reason,or between philosophical truth and dogmatic belief: those aregeneral questions which should be examined under the purviewof a single, specific form of research, since a relationshipcan only exist between works of the same kind. This is whyAverroes uses the word “parentage”, which has a meaningthat is more ontological than logical. For him it is actuallynot a case of bringing a rational view of things into harmonywith a religious view, but of discovering whether or not thereis a subjective parentage between the way of life according tothe wisdom that philosophy has as its goal, and the way of lifeaccording to Religious Law, which is revealed. So it is not fromthe perspective of an abstract problem that Averroes views theissue, but from the concrete perspective of men who are to liveand act in this world. They undoubtedly have a practical mind

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 89with which they are able to deliberate and to make decisions.But do they use it, and, we might add, are they capable of usingit well. Averroes’s fundamental idea, which is undoubtedlybased on daily experience, is that such is not the case. Religiouslaw is thus in his eyes something that comes to men as an aidto their failing reasons. What remains to be shown is that inacting in accord with the law, they behave according to reason,even though it is not reason that inspires them. (Arnaldez 2000,79–80)The real issues discussed by Ibn Rushd in this treatise havenothing to do with Islam and science discourse. What he isinterested in doing is to examine whether it is permitted,forbidden, commanded, recommended, or, finally, necessary, tolook at the Law with a philosophical or logical eye. Setting thenecessary aside, since it belongs to the domain of the rationalfaculty, the prescribed, the forbidden, the recommended (withits counterpart, the discouraged) and the licit are juridicalcategories (akhâm), in the name of which Muslim jurists seekthe nature of laws and qualify the acts that depend on them.Consequently, Averroes is not going to examine the Law on thebasis of reason, but reason on the basis of what characterizeslaws. (Arnaldez 2000, 80)Before closing this section, let us note that the tension thatexisted in the Islamic tradition as a result of the arrival of Greekphilosophy needs to be examined in its proper context in a workon philosophy and religion, for the debates that originated fromthis tension were philosophical debates and had little impact onthe natural sciences. It is also important to understand that certainphilosophers had political ambitions, were appointed to ministerialposts, and were, therefore, part of palace intrigues that sometimesled to their persecution. These instances have to be examined withinthe social and political context of the Abbasid Empire (or the specificSultanate where the incident took place); these cannot rightfully becited as persecution of philosophers because of their philosophy,as is often done. In one such work a rather dramatic account ofthe persecution of al-Kindi is made out to be a general situationprevailing in Islamic civilization:

90 • The Making of Islamic ScienceAs we have already mentioned, al-Kindi, al-Razi, Ibn Sina, andIbn Rushd were among the greatest philosophers. All werepersecuted to some extent.Al-Kindi’s case reveals important aspects of intellectual life inIslam. The first of the Islamic commentators on Aristotle, al-Kindi was at first favorably received by two caliphs (al-Mamunand al-Mutassim), but his luck ran out with al-Mutawaakil, theSunni caliph mentioned earlier. According to Pervez Hoodbhoy,“It was not hard for the ulema [religious scholars] to convincethe ruler that the philosopher had very dangerous beliefs.Mutawwakil soon ordered the confiscation of the scholar’spersonal library.… But that was not enough. The sixty-year-oldMuslim philosopher also received fifty lashes before a largecrowd which had assembled. Observers who recorded the eventsay the crowd roared approval with each stroke” (Hoodbhoy1991, 111). The other four [sic] scholars were also subjected tosome degree of persecution, and a number of them had to fleefor their safety. (Grant 2004, 239–40)This highly inaccurate account of intellectual life in Islam is basedon a book written by Hoodbhoy, a Pakistani physicist who wrote hiswork of questionable accuracy as a reaction to a superficial movementof Islamization patronized by a military general who had usurpedpower in a midnight coup. Hoodbhoy based his account on anothersecondary work, The Genius of Arab Civilization (Hayes 1983). Noneof these lead us to any primary source that can testify to the publicflogging. Grant adds certain details not found in Hoodbhoy.What we actually know, from the four classical primary sources(Ibn Nadim, Al-Qifti, Ibn Nabatah, Ibn Abi Usaibiah) that providethe bulk of known information about Muslim scholars, is ratherdifferent. While in Baghdad, al-Kindi was appointed tutor to Ahmad,the son of the Caliph al-Mu‘tasim, and was highly respected. Ibn AbiUsaibiah’s important work Tabaqat al-Atibba’ tells us of al-Kindi’s greatfame, his advanced knowledge, his famous library, and also aboutthe favors he received from the caliphs (including al-Mutawakkil,the “Sunni” caliph—the other caliphs were also Sunni—made outas the villain of the case). The full account of the “public beating”narrated by Ibn Abi Usaibiah does not mention ulema at all, instead

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 91he names two contemporary rivals: Muhammad and Ahmad, the sonsof Musa ibn Shakir, who lived during the reign of al-Mutawakkil, wereconspiring against everyone who was advanced in knowledge. Theysent a certain Sanad ibn Ali to Baghdad so that he might remove al-Kindi from al-Mutawakkil. Their conspiracies succeeded to the pointthat al-Mutawakkil ordered al-Kindi to be beaten. His whole librarywas confiscated and put in a separate place, labeled as the “KindianLibrary” (Sharif 1963, vol. 1, 422).In short, it is safe to say that secondary literature on Islam andscience is full of numerous inaccuracies that beget more inaccuraciesin a vicious cycle. It is time, however, to turn to one of the mostimportant issues in the discourse: beginnings.In the BeginningNothing is more important for religion and science discourse than thequestion of origins. This is the most important issue in this discourse,not merely due to Darwinian and neo-Darwinian accounts of originsbut because the questions related to the origin of the cosmos andlife have a direct impact on all other issues of the discourse. Howand when did the cosmos come into existence? Was it created by aCreator—as religious traditions tell us—or did it come into existenceon its own from some eternal matter that existed for itself? If Godcreated it, out of what was it created? And how did that thing out ofwhich the cosmos was created come into existence? If the cosmosis believed to have come into existence as an act of a Creator whospecifically chose to create, then our understanding of the createdcosmos is directly related to the Creator, the purpose of creation, andthe nature of the God–humanity relationship. If, on the other hand,the world is considered to be a self-emergent product of a big or smallbang, or that of an autonomous wave of energy floating in an eternaluniverse billions of years ago, and if life is a derivative of the cooling,splitting, and re-formation of inorganic matter resulting from theformer process, then our entire conception of human existence onEarth is conditioned differently. Thus, the question of how the cosmoscame into existence is for the religion and science discourse what anucleus is for an atom, and all other issues in the discourse are like

92 • The Making of Islamic Scienceelectrons that revolve around that nucleus. The question of originshas dominated the science and religion discourse since antiquity andit continues to hold a special position in the contemporary discourse.The question of origins became a central issue in the Islamicscientific and philosophical traditions after the translation ofthe Greek texts in the eighth century, and remained so for severalcenturies. The main question discussed by a host of scientists,philosophers, and religious scholars pertained to the temporalbeginning of the cosmos versus its eternity. Muslim philosophersof the first four Islamic centuries, heavily indebted as they were tothe Aristotelian tradition, attempted to “Islamize” Aristotle’s eternaluniverse, while those who opposed them considered their position tobe a sign of disbelief. These debates have parallels in both the Jewishand the Christian traditions.In general, the Biblical and the QurāĀnic accounts of creation areunderstood as creatio ex nihilo, whereas any kind of eternal emanationis considered a nonreligious position. A closer look at the medievalcreation/emanation debates, however, suggests that the point ofcontention was more refined, focusing on gratuitous originationversus necessity in the emanation model. In these debates we findJewish, Christian, and Muslim scholars commenting on each other’spositions. For example, Moses ben Maimon (1135–1204), commonlyknown as Maimonides, and Thomas Aquinas (ca. 1225–1274)argued for necessity; the question of creation in time or without anabsolute beginning was secondary for them, though they understoodthe Biblical account of creation as involving an initial moment.In forcefully stating his philosophical position, Maimonides wassimultaneously responding to both Aristotle and Ibn Sina, the mostrepresentative follower of Aristotle among Muslim philosophers.In the Islamic tradition, initial ideas on origins were formulatedsolely in the light of QurāĀnic data and the sayings of the Prophet.Subsequently, under the influence of Greek thought, variousphilosophical cosmologies arose. Certain philosophers acceptedAristotle’s ideas about the origins and attempted to harmonize themwith QurāĀnic data; others opposed these efforts. This generatedtension that lasted for several centuries. To explore these debates in

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 93more detail, let us begin with the QurāĀnic data and the tradition ofsacred cosmology that arose from reflection on these data.Qurāānic DataAs already mentioned, the sciences of the QurāĀn were the first toappear in the Islamic intellectual tradition. This was followed by thesciences dealing with the life and sayings of the Prophet of Islam.Thus, when the scientific and philosophical traditions emerged inIslamic civilization they emerged from within a specific intellectualcontext shaped by the QurāĀnic worldview.The QurāĀnic verses on the origins of the cosmos appear invarious chapters and are invariably connected with the argumentsfor the three main themes of the QurāĀn: Tawhid (Oneness of God),Risalah (Prophethood), and Ma‘ad (Return). These verses also stressthe absolute nature of the creative act of God, for when He desiresto create something, He merely says ‘Be’ and it is (Q. 36:82). Creation isseen as God’s bounteous gift; one of the most recurring themes ofthe QurāĀn is God as Creator. This is reflected in the frequency ofvariants of the idea of creation, such as khalaqa, bada’a, fatara, andja‘ala, about which more shall be said in the next section. In additionto the general account of creation, the QurāĀn also offers a morespecific description, which we have already outlined in Chapter 3:God created the Heavens and the Earth and all that is between themin six days (Q. 7:54-56; 25:59); He created the Earth in two days (Q.41:9); and placed therein firm mountains [towering] above its surface andbestowed blessings on it, and equitably apportioned its means of sustenancein four days (Q. 41:10); He turned toward the heaven, which was [yetbut] smoke; and He said to it and the Earth: ‘come both of you, willinglyor unwillingly’ to which both responded, ‘we do come in obedience.’ And Hethen decreed that it [the smoke] become seven heavens in two days, and Heimparted unto each heaven its function (Q. 41:12); He created the sevenheavens (Q. 2:29); one upon another (Q. 67:3); through them flows downfrom on high, His Will (Q. 65:12). Moreover, the QurāĀn is particularlyemphatic that all that exists is sustained by God, whose attribute Rabbmeans the One Who sustains. It also repeatedly points out that God’screation has a purpose and a plan (Q. 15:21; 25:2; 30:8-9). God has

94 • The Making of Islamic Scienceadorned the sky with stars (Q. 67:5) and is the One who has set inmotion all the stars and planets so that humanity may be guided bytheir positions in its travels (Q. 6:97); He is the One Who covers theday with the night and the night with the day (Q. 7:54; 39:5). He hascreated the day and the night (Q. 21:33), the sun and the moon, eachrevolving in its precise orbit (Q. 39:5).The Radiant CosmographyReflections on QurāĀnic cosmological data by the Companionsof the Prophet were supplemented by his sayings on the creationof the heavens and the earth. This was to give birth to an Islamiccosmological tradition based on the interpretation of the QurāĀnicdata, the sayings of the Prophet, and reflections on these twoprimary sources by the Companions of the Prophet. This was latersupplemented by scientific observations. During the subsequentcenturies, many other cosmological schemes and models wereformulated by Muslim scientists and scholars, but all of those schemeswere compared to this early cosmology. This first cosmology has beencalled the Radiant Cosmography (al-hay’a as-saniya) by Jalal al-Dinas-Suyuti (d. 1505), whose book of the same title summarizes eightcenturies of scholarship on this topic.Four attributes of God mentioned by the QurāĀn are especiallyrelevant to this cosmology: al-Khâliq (the Creator), al-Bâri (theMaker), al-Mušawwir (the Shaper), and al-Badî‘ (the Originator). Theearly commentators explained these attributes in detail. They alsowrote exegeses on the verses related to the creation of the cosmos andproduced a small body of literature that outlined essential aspects ofthis early Islamic cosmology much before the emergence of sciencein Islamic civilization and before any translations were made fromGreek, Indian, or Persian sources. There are two main aspects to thisearly cosmology: spiritual and physical. The spiritual cosmology cameinto existence as a result of profound meditation on the cosmologicalverses of the QurāĀn, such as the famous “Verse of the Throne” (Q.2:255) and the Light Verse (Q. 24:25). This cosmology envisionsa spiritual hierarchy of existence and uses symbolic language.The physical cosmos is not absent from this cosmology, but it is

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 95perceived in relation to the nonphysical. Some of the most eminentcommentators of the QurāĀn from the generation of the Companionsof the Prophet have left fairly specific comments on the creation ofthe cosmos. These comments were passed down, generation aftergeneration, were elaborated and explained by other scholars, andhave been meticulously preserved in exegetical literature. Thetwenty-ninth verse of the second chapter of the QurāĀn, for instance,mentions the creation of the seven heavens in a succinct manner: He[God] is the One Who created for you all that is on earth; then He paidattention to the sky and fashioned it as seven perfect [heavens]; He has fullknowledge of everything (Q. 2:29). Commenting on this verse, a numberof Companions, including Ibn Abbas (d. 687)—the youngest of thefour most eminent commentators of the QurāĀn from the generationof the Companions—is reported to have said that “God’s Throne wason water when nothing other than water had been created yet. WhenHe decided to bring creation into being, He brought out smoke [or,steam] from the water, which raised upwards, and from this He madethe skies. Then the water dried up and He made one earth from it;then He fashioned seven earths from this one in two days… likewise,he fashioned seven heavens from the one He had made from thesmoke” (Ibn Kathir 1998, 214).As-Suyuti’s aforementioned work deals with a range ofcosmological concepts, situating everything within the QurāĀnicworldview. Thus we find sections on the Throne verse (Q. 2:255) andthe verse of the Tablet and the Pen (Q. 68:1), as well as on the sevenheavens and the seven earths, the dimensions of the cosmos, sun,moon, and stars, the comet, the Milky Way, rainbows, the night, theday, hours, and water and winds, mountains and rivers.It must be kept in mind that the QurāĀnic cosmological versesappear in the QurāĀn within the context of the QurāĀnic message.They have a specific vocabulary and are often cited as proofs of theOneness of God, His attributes, and His inexhaustible knowledge.Nevertheless, they do refer to the physical cosmos and its creation.This physical cosmology is part of the broader creation theme of theQurāĀn, which has multiple meanings that cannot be reduced to themere physical level.

96 • The Making of Islamic ScienceBased on QurāĀnic data, this cosmology became thecounterweight to the Aristotelian cosmology that came into Islamicthought in the translation movement. These debates took place inan intellectual atmosphere ripe with enthusiasm, in a social milieufull of new developments and constant internal strife, in an everexpandinggeographical setting, and in places as diverse as mosques,madrassahs, courts, palaces, markets, bookstores, and observatories.Those who took part in these debates were QurāĀn commentators,philosophers, scientists, Sufis, and men of letters and learning. Theearly exegetical tradition favored creation in time, for eternalitywas an attribute that could only be applied to God. Allah, there is nodeity but He, the Living, the Everlasting; slumber seizes Him not, nor sleep(Q. 2:255). This tradition also favored creatio ex nihilo, for anythingpreeternally existing with God would compromise the Oneness socentral to the QurāĀn. Creation in time is called hudûth in Arabic, andanything that is contingent is known as hâdith. Eternity is denotedby the word qidam and “eternal” by qadîm. Built into this technicalterminology is the notion of an Absolute, Sovereign God, uponWhom depends all that exists. Inherent to the term hudûth is the ideathat the thing referred to depends upon something external for itsexistence, and that it has come into existence after being nonexistent.These terms have slightly different meanings in philosophical, Kalam,and Sufi texts, and sometimes various thinkers have used themin different ways, but they in essence describe God’s relation to theworld in the Radiant Cosmology.The Making of the ConflictThe large amount of scientific and philosophical literature broughtto the Islamic tradition by the translation movement included specificcosmological schemes of the Greeks, the Persians, and the Indians.These cosmologies were then viewed, examined, and contrastedwith the QurāĀnic cosmology by Muslim thinkers; this produced alarge body of literature within the Islamic philosophical, scientific,and mystical traditions. This process went on for several centuries,producing new and refined schemes. In essence, it was an attempt to

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 97find ways to harmonize the received data and cosmological theorieswith the Islamic concept of cosmos. Although the process wascomplex and often fraught with tension, it was not a case of “Islamopposing science,” for the pre-Islamic cosmologies were anything butscientific and were rather philosophical constructions. Some of thereceived material was even in harmony or quite close to the Islamicview of the cosmos, though necessarily formulated in different terms.Pythagorean and Platonic schemes, for instance, were of great interestto the School of Illumination (al-Ishraq).The greatest influence upon the Islamic philosophical cosmologycame from Aristotle and his school. Translated into Arabic, hisMetaphysica, Physica, and De caelo influenced Islamic philosophicalcosmology like no other Greek, Persian, or Indian work. Hisinfluence especially impacted the Peripatetic School. The Aristoteliancorpus was, however, viewed by Muslim thinkers more often than notthrough the eyes of his Neoplatonic commentators (Nasr 2001, 365).Plotinus (d. 270 ce), the founder of neo-Platonism, and his studentPorphyry (d. ca. 301 ce) had a significant role to play in the remakingof the Aristotelian corpus. More important for the Arabic receptionof Aristotle however were the two sixth-century commentators ofAristotle, John Philoponus (fl. first half of the sixth century) andSimplicius (d. after 533); the former was known to the Arabs as Yahyaan-Nahwi, John the Grammarian. Philoponus was a Christian neo-Platonist critic of Aristotle, and thus his commentary was especiallysignificant for Islamic tradition, just as it was for Christianity.Plotinus was most probably an Egyptian by birth. He studiedphilosophy at Alexandria and taught in Rome, where he settledaround 243. Enneads, his collected works, contains six books ofnine tracts each. Plotinus’s description of God comes very close tothe QurāĀnic description. The transcendence underlined in theQurāĀnic verse There is nothing like unto Him (Q. 42:11) refers to anAll-Encompassing (al-Muhît) and All-Knowing (al-‘Alîm) God aboveand beyond all human conceptions, and who can only be defined vianegativa, by erasing from the mind any impurity foreign to the ideaof pure Divinity. Plotinus’s definition via negativa quite resemblesthis QurāĀnic description. As opposed to the QurāĀnic cosmology,however, he also believed that the world emanates from God by

98 • The Making of Islamic Sciencenecessity. God thus does not will the world to emerge, because thatwould imply change in Him. Like Plato, Plotinus believed in theimmortality of the soul and in its existence before the body. In hiscosmology, the material world was the last emanation, lying belowthe soul. He considered matter to be an antithesis of the One, havingno positive qualities. We will have more to say about the influenceof Plotinus on some Muslim philosophers in the next section, but letus mention here that it was his remarkable synthesis of monotheism,philosophical cosmology, and his strong rejection of Aristotle’s beliefin the eternity of the world that resonated with the views of someMuslim philosophers.Beginning in the eighth century, Muslim philosophers producedvarious cosmological doctrines that were often influenced by Greek,Persian, and Indian cosmologies, but that attempted to harmonizethe received material with Islamic beliefs. It is in these attempts thatwe begin to see the influence of Islam on philosophical cosmology. Tolook into this interaction in more detail, we first restate the essentialfeatures of Aristotelian cosmology (having already touched on someof its aspects in Chapter 3), and then proceed with a systematicaccount of the various cosmological schemes produced by Muslimthinkers between the eighth and the sixteenth centuries.Aristotelian CosmologyGrant has thus summarized Aristotle’s cosmology:For Aristotle, the cosmos was a gigantic spherical plenumthat had neither a beginning nor would ever have an end.Everything in existence lies within that sphere; nothing exists,or can possibly exist, outside of it: neither matter, nor emptyspace, nor time, nor place. Aristotle regarded it as nonsensicalto inquire about extracosmic existence, consequently rejectingthe possibility that other worlds might exist beyond our own.Within the cosmos, Aristotle distinguished two major divisions:the celestial regions and the terrestrial. The dividing linebetween the two regions was the concave surface of the lunarsphere. That surface divided two totally dissimilar regions.

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 99The terrestrial region, which lay below the concave lunarsurface, was a region of constant change and transformation. Itconsisted of four elements: earth, water, air, and fire, arrangedin this order from the center of the world to the moon’s concavesurface. All bodies were compounded of combinations of twoor more elements. In the terrestrial region, bodies were alwayscoming into being as differing compounds of the four elements,and bodies were always passing away because their elementseventually dissociated to combine with other elements and formnew compound bodies. At the center of the universe was theearth, surrounded in many of its parts by water and then airand fire.… In the upper atmosphere of the terrestrial region,just below the concave surface of the moon, Aristotle assumedthat comets, shooting stars, and other similar phenomenaoccurred. He inferred their existence in this region becausethey were changeable phenomena, and therefore could notoccur in the unchanging celestial region. (Grant 2004, 41)Aristotle attributed the lack of change in the celestial region toa fifth element: celestial ether, an incorruptible, eternal, and noblesubstance that suffers no change except that of place. It did not comeinto existence and will never pass away. He regarded the planetsand the stars as composed of ether and thus also undergoing onlyobservable change of place. He believed that the celestial regionwas superior to the terrestrial and had an influence on the latter.His cosmos was an eternal cosmos, without beginning or end. Itwas “caused” by a final cause, a God eternally absorbed in selfcontemplationto the extent that he has no immediate knowledge ofhis creation. Although not created by God, Aristotle’s cosmos was arationally constructed cosmos in which a certain order prevailed.In the Aristotelian system all bodies were composites of matterand form. Form is the active and matter the passive principle. A bodycan change into another through one of the four possible causes: (i)material; (ii) formal; (iii) efficient; and (iv) final-efficient. The materialcause refers to the matter from which something is made (e.g., thewood from which a table can be made); the formal cause is the essenceor inner structure of a thing (the shape of a table); the efficient causeis the agent or producer of the change (the carpenter who makes thetable); the final cause is the end or purpose for which an action is

100 • The Making of Islamic Scienceperformed (the table in the mind of the carpenter for which he or shehas a use). To take another famous example, Aristotle believed thatsince an acorn has the potentiality to become an oak tree, it will tryto realize the form of an oak tree through the operation of the finalefficientcause.Aristotle believed that these four causes can produce four kindsof changes: (i) substantial; (ii) qualitative; (iii) quantitative; and (iv)change of place. Of these four, the substantial change is the mostfundamental, since it involves replacement of one form with another,as when fire reduces a log to ashes. Qualitative change occurs whenone of the qualities of a body changes (the color of a leaf from greento yellow). Quantitative change increases or decreases the size of abody without altering its identity. The fourth kind of change moves abody from one place to another.Aristotle divided all existing things into two kinds: those thatexist by nature (such as plants and animals) and those that areproducts of art (such as tables and chairs). Things that exist by naturehave within them a principle of change, whereas products of arthave no innate impulse to change. Thus, a tree will change becauseof its innate nature, whereas a table or a chair will not, unless theseproducts of art are composed of things that do have an impulse tochange. Aristotle also regarded nature as a “cause”—a principle ofmotion and change—that operates for a purpose. It was the functionof physics to explore the causes and motions and changes producedby causes.Islamic Philosophical CosmologiesIn addition to the already discussed “Radiant Cosmology,” severalother cosmological doctrines appeared between the eighth and theseventeenth centuries. In spite of their roots in Islamic beliefs, theyreflect, to a greater or lesser degree, Pythagorean, Hermetic, Greek,Persian, and Indian influences. It is important to note, however, thatdespite these influences all of these apparently different cosmologiesare concerned with reconstructing the cosmos so that Islam’s mostbasic tenet, Oneness of God (Tawhid), becomes its operative principle.In cases where this could not be accomplished to a satisfactory

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 101degree, conflicts engaged the best minds of that time in debates thathave left a rich legacy of intellectual interaction: an al-Ghazali versusan Ibn Sina, an Ibn Rushd against an al-Ghazali. It should again benoted that these conflicts are not, strictly speaking, conflicts betweenscience and Islam; rather, these are conflicts between views of onephilosopher and another, both of whom are attempting to produce asystematic account of the cosmos based on rational thought.One of the most important philosophical cosmology in Islambelongs to the Peripatetic School, best represented by Ibn Sina.Honorifically called al-Shaykh al-Ra’is, the Grand Shaikh, IbnSina’s prodigious learning is legendary. Born in Afshanah, a villagein present-day Uzbekistan not far from Bukhara, in August orSeptember 980, to the governor of that village, Ibn Sina had masteredmany traditional sciences and a large part of Greek philosophy beforehe was twenty. He studied Isagoge, Porphyry’s introduction to theOrganon of Aristotle, with a reputed philosopher of the time, al-Natili,and then moved on to study the works of Euclid and Ptolemy. Soonhis teacher left Bukhara, but he “continued the study of texts—theoriginal and commentaries—in natural sciences and metaphysics.” Atthe age of sixteen, he embarked upon reading logic and other partsof philosophy, as he tells us in his short autobiography:Then, for the next year and a half, I dedicated myself tolearning and reading; I returned to reading logic and all partsof philosophy. During this time I did not sleep completelythrough a single night nor devoted myself to anything else byday… thus I mastered the logical, natural, and mathematicalsciences, and I had now reached the science of metaphysics. Iread the Metaphysics [of Aristotle], but I could not comprehendits contents, and its author’s objective remained obscure tome, even when I had gone back and read it forty times andhad got to the point where I had memorized it. In spite of thisI could not understand it nor its objective and I despaired ofmyself and said: “This is a book for which there is no way ofunderstanding”. But one day in the afternoon when I was atthe booksellers’ quarter, a seller approached me with a book inhis hand which he was selling by calling out loud. He offeredit to me but I refused it with disgust believing that there wasno merit in this science. But he said to me, “buy it, because its

102 • The Making of Islamic Scienceowner needs money and so it is cheap. I will sell it to you forthree dirhams”. So, I bought it and, lo and behold, it was AbuNasr al-Farabi’s book on the objects of Metaphysics. I returnedhome and was quick to read it, and in no time the objects ofthat book became clear to me because I had got to the point ofhaving memorized it by heart. I rejoiced at this and the nextday gave much in alms to the poor in gratitude to God, theExalted. (Ibn Sina tr. 1974, 25–35)Ibn Sina was to remain committed to the Aristotelian frameworkfor the rest of his life, and leave behind a legacy of philosophical textsthat would influence the course of Islamic philosophical thought formany centuries. Later, he and Ibn Rushd, a great philosopher fromSpain committed to a similar understanding of the cosmos, wouldbecome the two most important Muslims to influence philosophy inthe Latin West.Ibn Sina outlined his cosmological doctrines in his majorphilosophical works, which include al-Shifa (The Book of Healing), al-Najat (The Book of Salvation), al-Mabda’ wa’l Ma‘ad (The Beginning andthe End), and the Isharat (The Book of Directives and Remarks); his greatwork on medicine, al-Qanun fi’l tibb (Canon of Medicine), also containsa great deal of cosmological thought.Ibn Sina envisioned the cosmos in an Aristotelian manner, usedhis terminology (form, matter, accidents), and defined change as thepassage from potency to act. He lists six causes instead of Aristotle’sfour, but his two additional causes (the matter and form of thecomposed) are reducible to the given of the accident and the form ofthe matter, respectively.Ibn Sina’s cosmology, however, differs from Aristotle’s in twoimportant respects. For Aristotle, the distinction between essence andexistence was only a logical distinction. Ibn Sina made this distinctionontological. That is to say, Ibn Sina considered this distinctionpresent in every being except the Divine Being. This allowed himto preserve a uniquely Islamic view of existence of things, becauseevery existent in which this distinction is to be found must come intoexistence through an agent in whom these two are united, and thisleads to the division of beings into contingent and necessary. Thesecond major difference between the cosmologies of Aristotle and

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 103Ibn Sina is the manner in which Ibn Sina attempts to preserve theOneness of the Necessary Being while at the same time seeking toexplain multiplicity. He did this by adopting emanation theory ina manner akin to the neo-Platonists. Both of these distinctions aretypically Islamic needs of a philosopher who was otherwise committedto Aristotle like no other Muslim philosopher before him.In a number of works, such as his Book of Healing and TheBeginning and the End, Ibn Sina first proves that there is a NecessaryBeing, then establishes the Uniqueness and Oneness of this NecessaryBeing. It should be noted that Ibn Sina’s Necessary Being is not thesame as Aristotle’s deity. His Necessary Being is the Most Beautiful,Perfect, and Best, a Being prior in existence to everything and thesource of the existence of everything. Moreover, it is a Being freefrom matter, One and Simple in all respects.In Ibn Sina’s cosmology, multiplicity arises through emanationfrom Pure Being. There are grades and degrees of existence. In thissystem, Allah is at the summit. He brings into being the Pure Spirit,called the Primary Cause. From this Cause come the souls, bodiesof the spheres, and the intelligences. From the tenth intelligenceemerges the sublunary region. According to Ibn Sina, this intelligenceis caused by intellectual emanation proceeding from God and endingwith the human rational soul. Its primary function is to give corporealform to matter and intellectual form to the rational soul, hence itsname: the giver of forms (wahib al-suwar). In this scheme, the beingsnear the periphery of the universe and close to the Primary Bodythat surrounds the cosmos are closer to the Necessary Being andare purer than those near the earth. Ibn Sina envisions an impetusin all bodies that is a desire to reach perfection that belongs to theNecessary Being.Later in his life Ibn Sina wrote three visionary recitals thatoffer a different cosmological perspective from his better-knownPeripatetic works. In these recitals, which are now the last chaptersof his Book of Directives and Remarks, Ibn Sina describes “the Universeas a vast cosmos of symbols through which the initiate seeking DivineKnowledge, or gnosis (ma‘rifah), must travel. The cosmos, instead ofbeing an exterior object, becomes for the Gnostic an interior reality;

104 • The Making of Islamic Sciencehe sees all the diversities of Nature reflected in the mirror of his ownbeing” (Nasr 1993, 263).This spiritual cosmology was later developed by other schoolsof thought, especially the School of Illumination (Ishraqi), whoseillustrious founder, Shihab al-Din Suhrawardi (d. 1187), was initiallycontent with Ibn Sina’s philosophy, which he had studied in his youthbut which he abandoned after a dream in which Aristotle appeared tohim “revealing the doctrine later known as ‘knowledge by presence’and asserting the superiority of the Ancients and certain of the Sufisover the Peripatetics” (Suhrawardi tr. 1999, xvi).The Illuminationist philosophy is based on “unveiling.” It givesan important epistemological role to intuition. In logic, “Suhrawardirejected Peripatetic essential definition, arguing that essences couldonly be known through direct acquaintance” (Suhrawardi tr. 1999,xx). Suhrawardi believed there were a great many more intellects thanthe ten of Ibn Sina. His work consists of two parts, the first dealingwith logic (in three discourses) and the second with the “science oflights” (in five discourses). Instead of the self-evident substance ofAristotle, here we have light as the foundational entity upon whichthe entire system of Illuminationist philosophy is built. Thus, thebasic metaphysical concepts in this system are light, darkness,independence, and dependence. Light is self-evident and it makesother things evident. Suhrawardi identifies four classes of beings:self-subsistent light, which is self-conscious and is the cause of allother classes of beings; accidental light, which includes both physicallight and some accidents in immaterial light; dusky substances (whichare material bodies), and dark accidents, which include both physicalaccidents and some accidents of immaterial light. His cosmogonyexplains how all other beings came into existence from the Light ofLights (God).Another outstanding scientist-philosopher who has left us acosmological scheme different from the Peripatetic cosmologyis al-Biruni, who was born eight years before Ibn Sina and diedfourteen years after him. Born outside (birun) present-day Khiva in973, al-Biruni had a very independent mind that would not acceptanything merely on authority. This is evident from his attitudetoward Abu Zakaria al-Razi, often touted as the most “free-thinking”

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 105of the major philosophers of Islam. He studied al-Razi’s philosophy,even produced a bibliography of the works of the elder scholar,yet condemned him for his errors (Nasr 1993, 109). Al-Biruni’scosmology is also most clearly imbued with the QurāĀnic descriptionsof the cosmos. Although he lived at a time when the impact of thetranslation movement was the strongest, he rejected the argumentsof the Greek philosophers on the eternity of the world and produceda cosmology based on ex nihilo creation. His cosmological doctrinesreveal an amazing synthesis of his observations during travels,his readings, and scientific experiments. As Nasr has pointedout, perhaps the most remarkable feature of his cosmology is thequalitative understanding of time (Nasr 1993, 118). He believed thattime does not unfold in uniform manner. In other words, the socalledlaws of nature have not been operating in the same mannerover the entire length of time since creation. Al-Biruni may havereached at this qualitative understanding of time during his travelsin India, because it is a central doctrine of the Hindu cosmology. Foral-Biruni, time has a beginning and an end. He looks at geologicalchanges over long spans of time as proof of lack of permanence anddescribes changes in mountains, rivers, deserts, and other apparentlystable and permanent-looking features of the Earth.Al-Biruni’s concept of nature is directly relevant to our book,for here we find empirical evidence for the claim that the QurāĀnicview of nature previously outlined deeply affected the way naturewas perceived and studied by Muslim scientists of the period betweenthe eighth and sixteenth centuries. This understanding was sodeeply embedded that no one felt the need to write a book on therelationship between their science and faith, yet the entire frameworkfor the study of nature was based on the QurāĀnic view, which is notmerely limited to the theme of creation but encompasses a teleologythat reminds awakened hearts to observe the manifest signs of God’sWisdom and Design in nature. That there is nothing superfluous innature is not due to chance, but is a manifestation of Allah’s Wisdomand Power—a bountiful expression of His act of measuring out foreach creature which it needs. Or, as al-Biruni puts it:All our praise and encomiums are for Him alone, Who has soshaped life that each creature can sustain itself and live in a

106 • The Making of Islamic Sciencemeasured way, where there is no excess and no want; and forsustenance has made food the principal cause, and throughwhich each body grows on all sides, so that the food, after beingdigested, helps it (to sustain itself).God has made plants content themselves with little food, foodthat is not consumed rapidly… water seeps in and traversesto their roots. Air, heated by the sun, absorbs moisture fromtheir branches, and transports it upwards. Whatever is thusacquired from below is transported to the branches and causesthem to grow. And they produce what they are created for, beit the generation of leaves, or flowers, or fruits. (al-Biruni, tr.1989, 3-4)Humans may find “fault” in nature, but it is really humanshortsightedness that construes a function of nature as a “fault,” for“it only serves to show that the Creator who had designed somethingdeviating from the general tenor of things is infinitely sublime,beyond everything which we poor sinners may conceive and predicateof Him” (Nasr 1993, 124).Some time toward the end of the tenth century or early in theeleventh, al-Biruni corresponded with Ibn Sina on various aspectsof the physical sciences and Aristotle’s ideas. This correspondence,containing eighteen questions and their responses, not only countersthe notion Islamic scientific tradition was only the work of a fewindividuals working in isolation, but also provides insights intothe independence of al-Biruni, who calls into question many wellestablishedAristotelian notions, often using his own observationsand experiments as proofs (al-Biruni, tr. 2001-6, 91). A case inpoint is the sixth question in this correspondence, in which al-Biruni objects to the Aristotelian understanding of the process ofsolidification of water upon cooling. “I have broken many bottles[by freezing them],” he tells Ibn Sina, “and they all break outward,rather than collapse inwardly.” What he leads to is the lower densityof water in the solid state than in the liquid state, which is why thevolume of water increases upon freezing and flasks break outwardly.This was in contrast to Ibn Sina’s views (based on Aristotle). This isa remarkable insight into the nature of the water molecule from the

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 107tenth century, when modern-day instruments were not available todetect hydrogen bonding.Al-Biruni’s unique contribution to cosmology lies in the way hisentire system is interlinked. He provides a detailed description of thesublunary world, gives geographical details of the various regions ofthe earth, describes the formation of mountains, clouds, dry and wetlands, the seven climes, and numerous minerals, plants, and animals.In his writings on the animal and plant kingdom, his ideas aredirectly inspired by the QurāĀn, just as his overall scheme of humanexistence and the human relationship with the world. For example,in his description of the senses of hearing and sight in humanbeings, al-Biruni states: “Sight was made the medium so that [man]traces among the living things the signs and wisdom, and turns fromthe created things to the Creator” (al-Biruni, tr. 1989, 5). Then hecites the verse We shall show them Our signs on the horizons and withinthemselves until it will be manifest unto them that it is the truth (Q. 41:53).Islamic cosmological schemes continued to explore various aspectsof the discipline after the death of al-Biruni and Ibn Sina, thoughthe groundbreaking works of the tenth and the eleventh centuriesremained dominant. A special genre of interest is the “Wonders ofCreation” tradition, which sought to describe the entire universe. Thetwelfth and the thirteenth centuries were particularly rich in theseencyclopedic writings.God, Creation, and the Concept of Eternity of the WorldIn contrast to our own era, the existence of God was not a widespreadissue during the Middle Ages (at least in the geographical areaunder consideration). Atheism and agnosticism did not exist in thepublic sphere. Muslim, Christian, and Jewish philosophers of thattime constructed their metaphysics, physics, and cosmology on theunderstanding that God exists. What was sometimes disputed wasthe provability of God’s existence, for some philosophers believedthat such a proof could be offered rationally while others demurred.Those who attempted to provide proofs for the existence of God canbe divided into two broad categories: those who demonstrated theexistence of God from the premise of the world’s eternity and those

108 • The Making of Islamic Sciencewho based their proofs on the premise of its creation in time. Theissue of the eternity of the world and its creation was, therefore, themost central issue in the Muslim and Jewish philosophical traditionsduring the Middle Ages (Davidson 1987, 1). What was at stake wasnot merely hermeneutics, as the issue had a whole range of basicproblems attached to it, including the relationship between God andthe universe on the one hand and God and humanity on the other.Furthermore, it involved such questions as whether God is a necessaryor a voluntary cause. The most contended point revolved around thewill of the deity. If the world should be eternal, the deity’s relationshipto the universe would also be eternal.Since eternity and necessity are, by virtue of an Aristotelianrule, mutually implicative, an eternal relationship is arelationship bound by necessity; and necessity excludes will.The eternity of the world thus would imply that the deityis, as the cause of the universe, bereft of will. A beginning ofthe world would, by contrast, lead to a deity possessed of will.(Davidson 1987, 1–2)Though both premises could be used to construct proofs for theexistence of God, the deities arrived at through chain of reasoningbased on the two premises would be different. In the argument for theexistence of God as the prime mover, Aristotle demonstrated that theworld is eternal; its eternal existence is caused; and that this cause isthe deity. The Platonic procedure favored by the Kalam tradition, onthe other hand, takes creation as its indispensable premise. Since theworld came into existence after not having been existent, there mustbe a creator who brought it into existence. The deity shown to existby either procedure has three distinct qualities: it is a being whichis uncaused, incorporeal, and one. Proof based on the premise ofeternity does not show volition to be a characteristic of the deity. Thislack of volition became a point of contention. Some philosophers didnot take either of the two premises into consideration and so avoidedaltogether the issue of volition in the deity. Another procedure,adopted by Ibn Tufayl (d. 1185), Maimonides, and Thomas Aquinas,was to use both premises to provide proofs for the existence of God.Ibn Tufayl noted in his celebrated philosophical tale Hayy Ibn Yaqzan(Living, Son of the Awake) that the issue was unresolvable, and that the

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 109existence of God would have been conclusively demonstrated only ifshown to follow from both the hypothesis of the world’s eternity andits creation (Ibn Tufayl, tr. 1972, 81–86).These debates came into the Islamic tradition from Greek sourcesalong with the entire stock of commentaries on Aristotle’s originalproof for the existence of God. The translation movement also broughtinto Arabic the entire stock of refutations of Aristotle’s arguments,most important the refutation of John Philoponus, who systematicallyrefuted all the arguments for the eternity of the world put together byAristotle and Proclus (ca. d. 485). These stock proofs and refutationswere supplemented by numerous subtle refinements by Muslim andJewish philosophers over the centuries. One of the most importantaspects of the Islamic as well as Jewish traditions is that whereasAristotle had taken the world as his point of departure, Muslim andJewish philosophers often take God as their point of departure.These debates involved a large number of philosophers, whowere sometimes also scientists, but there were no means available tothem to test their arguments by experiments such as carbon dating;all they had were philosophical tools such as logic. In the courseof these debates, a further refinement of the argument led somephilosophers to postulate that matter was eternal, but the world inits present form was created in time. Thus, the entire debate can bedivided into three categories: (i) arguments for the eternity of bothmatter and the world; (ii) arguments for the creation of both matterand the world; and (iii) arguments for the eternity of matter butcreation of the world.That it is impossible for generation to take place from nothingwas the foundation of Aristotle’s argument, but those who opposedeternity attempted to show that it was a feeble foundation. Itsultimate counterargument rested on the point that what we observetoday to be a law of nature cannot be retrojectively assumed for atime hidden from us. Thus, the fact that we never observe a henexcept from an egg or an egg except from a hen cannot be extendedbeyond our observation to the remote past. Many Kalam writers,such as Abd al-Jabbar (d. 1024) and al-Juwayni (d. 1085), refutedthe eternity of the world on the basis of this argument, which hadalready been put forward by John Philoponus.

110 • The Making of Islamic ScienceThe terminology of these thinkers, however, is uniquely QurāĀnic.They showed that the advocates of eternity (dahriya) proceed fromwhat is present and perceivable (shahid)—the world as it is today—towhat is not present and perceivable (gha’ib), applying the samelaws of nature, and that this is untenable (Davidson 1987, 30). Jabirbin Hayyan had also used the same argument. In addition to thiscomprehensive argument, advocates of creation also offered individualand specific refutations.There are three basic proofs for eternity that take the Creator astheir point of departure; these have been succinctly put together byDavidson as(i) no given moment, as against any other, could have suggesteditself to the Creator as the proper moment for creating theuniverse; (ii) the cause of the universe must be unchangeableand could not, therefore, have undertaken the act of creationafter having failed to do so; and (iii) the cause of the universepossesses certain eternal attributes and that the existence of theuniverse is an expression of those attributes; since the attributesare eternal, the universe, which they give rise to, must likewisebe eternal. (Davidson 1987, 49)Muslim philosophers probably received these proofs throughProclus and added various refinements to them. In Ibn Sina’s Shifa’,for instance, one finds a rhetorical question: “How within [the stretchof] nonexistence could one time be differentiated for [a creator’s] notacting and another time for [his] starting to act? How might one timediffer from another?” (Ibn Sina, tr. 1960, 378). This main argumentwas supplemented by many variations. One such variation runsas follows: For the Creator to become active after having remainedinactive would have to be due to a new and external factor, which inturn would by necessity have to be due to yet another factor, leadingto an absurd infinite regress of causes. This was the position of Abdal-Jabbar (d. 1024), al-Baqillani (d. 1013), Ibn Sina, and Ibn Rushd,among others. Interestingly, the formulation of this argument wasfurther refined by opponents of eternity including al-Ghazali, Fakhral-Din al-Razi, and al-Amidi (d. 1233). They used the term tippingthe scales to restate this argument. That is, something had to tip the

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 111scales (from nonexistence to existence) at the moment of creation forthe world to be created.In response to this argument, advocates of creation pointed outthat since time did not exist prior to its creation, before and after haveno meaning. Following al-Ghazali, Fakhr al-Din al-Razi also offersanother argument as a response to advocates of eternity: it is in thenature of God’s will to choose a particular time for creation; He canwill something irrespective of determinant factors; His knowledgedetermines the appropriate time for creation (Ceylan 1996, 52). Al-Ghazali’s other response to the argument was as follows:With what [argument] would you deny one who says: “Theworld was temporally created by an eternal will that decreed itsexistence at the time in which it came to be; that [the preceding]nonexistence continued to the point at which [the world] began;that existence prior to this was not willed and for this reasondid not occur; that at the time at which [the world] was createdit was willed by the eternal will to be created at that time andfor this reason it was created then?” What is there to disallowsuch a belief and what would render it impossible? (al-Ghazali,tr. 2000, 15)The standard kalam proof for creation was offered from accidents.Since accidents are necessary concomitants of bodies and are subjectto generation, bodies too must be subject to generation; since theuniverse is a body, it must therefore have been generated. This proofwas already current in the ninth century (it can be found in thework of Abu al-Hudhayl, who died in 849), and remained a standardresponse to the advocates of eternity for the next several centuries.Before closing this section dealing with the pre-Mongol period, weneed to mention one more cosmology in some detail, because it is themost important mystical understanding of the cosmos developed inIslamic thought—the cosmological scheme of Ibn al-‘Arabi (d. 1240).Mystical Aspects of Islamic CosmologyBorn in Murcia, southeastern Spain, fifty-four years after al-Ghazali’sdeath in 1111, Muhammad bin Ali bin Muhammad Ibn al-‘Arabial-Ta‘i al-Hatim was to become a bridge between the pre- and post-

112 • The Making of Islamic ScienceMongol phases of Muslim history and, perhaps more important,between the western and eastern Sufi orders of the Muslim world. Hewas to leave behind teachings and insights of several generations ofSufis who preceded him in a vast and systematic corpus that providesa unique insight into the mystical cosmos. He was also to leave behinda tapestry of oral tradition, along with a treasure-trove of technicalterms and symbols enriched over centuries. To a Muslim worldthat was soon to suffer a blow from the Mongols he left a definitivestatement of Sufi teachings and a full record of Islam’s esotericheritage. His cosmology is important in itself, but its importancebecomes even greater when viewed in the light of its impact onsubsequent Islamic thought.His stepson and disciple in Konya, Sadr al-Din al-Qunawi (d.1274), served to transmit his teachings to the Muslim East. Qunawi,a Persian by birth, himself a scholar of Hadith and a Sufi master ofhigh standing, was also well-versed in Peripatetic philosophy, whichhe tried to harmonize with the mystical teachings of Ibn al-‘Arabi.Qunawi thus serves as a link between the Peripatetic and Suficosmologies. He initiated a correspondence with Nasir al-Din al-Tusi(d. 1274), the great Shia theologian who revived Ibn Sina’s teachingsin the thirteenth century, in order to “combine the conclusionsderived from logical proofs with those gained by unveiling, opening,and face to face vision of the unseen world” (Chittick 1989, xix).Thus he was the Shaykh, spiritual master, of Qutb al-Din al-Shirazi,the notable commentator on the Ishraqi philosophy of Suhrawardi,and Fakhr al-din al-Iraqi (d. 1289), the great mystical poet, andan intimate friend of Jalal al-Din Rumi (d. 1273), the author of theMasnawi. A century later the teachings of Ibn al-‘Arabi inspiredanother great mystical figure, Abd al-Karim al-Jilli (d ca. 1424), whowrote al-Insan al-Kamil. Through Ibn al-‘Arabi, Rumi in the East andAbu al-Hasan al-Shadhili (d. 1258) in the West emerged as two of thegreatest Sufis in history, and their thought influenced a number ofmystical cosmologies both in the East and in the West. In the Indiansubcontinent, one can find the impact of Ibn al-‘Arabi’s cosmology onthe thought of Shaykh Ahmad Sirhindi (d. 1624) and Shah Wali Allahof Delhi (d. 1762).

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 113Before we outline Ibn al-‘Arabi’s cosmology, something must besaid about him, for this provides a background for understandingthe unique world from which he emerged. He was a member of adistinguished family known for its piety. His father, Ali ibn al-‘Arabi,was a man of standing and influence. The famous philosopher IbnRushd was one of his friends and Ibn al-‘Arabi met him while he wasstill a youth and Ibn Rushd an old and famous man; the encounterbetween the two has become somewhat proverbial. Two of Ibn al-‘Arabi’s maternal uncles (Abu Muslim al-Khawlani and Yahya binYughan) were Sufis. His family moved to Seville when he was eight. InSeville, Ibn al-‘Arabi received his formal education, which consistedof the study of the QurāĀn and its commentary, the traditions ofthe Prophet, Law (Shari‘ah), Arabic grammar, and composition. Hestudied with the great masters of his time and was initiated into theSufi way in 1184, when he was twenty. Among the subjects taught inthe Sufi circles were the metaphysical doctrines of Sufism, cosmology,esoteric exegesis, the science of letters and numbers, and the stages ofthe Way. In addition, the disciple spent long hours every day engagedin the practices of sufism: invocations, prayers, fasting, vigils, retreat,and meditation.At thirty, he left the Iberian Peninsula for the first time to visitTunis. Later he travelled to Fez, then to Alexandria and Cairo, andarrived in Makkah a year before the close of the sixth Islamic century.In Makkah he started to write his enormous compendium of esotericknowledge, al-Futuhat al-Makkiyyah, consisting of 560 chapters. In theyear 1204, Ibn al-‘Arabi left Makkah and travelled via Baghdad toMosul, where he spent some time in studying and where he composeda treatise of fifty-three chapters on the esoteric significance ofablution and prayer entitled al-Tanazzulat al-Mawsiliyyah (Revelationsat Mosul). From there he went to Cairo before returning to Makkah in1207, where he resumed his studies of the Traditions of the Prophet.He stayed in Makkah just over a year and then went northwards toAsia Minor. He arrived in Konya in 1210, where he met his closestdisciple, Sadr al-Din al-Qunawi. In 1223 he settled in Damascus,where he died in 1240, leaving behind a circle of disciples whose linecontinues to this day.

114 • The Making of Islamic ScienceOne of the most important terms in Ibn al-‘Arabi’s cosmologyis wujûd (existence, being), a term already employed by generationsof philosophers before him. In Ibn al-‘Arabi’s usage, however, thisterm gained a specific meaning, derived from its basic etymologicalroot, which literally means “finding.” It was already a well-accepteddoctrine of Islamic tradition that, strictly speaking, this term can onlybe applied to God, Who alone has true existence; all else that existsdoes so because its existence has been willed and granted by God;thus, everything other than God derives its existence from God’samr (command), and perishes when God no longer supports theirexistence (wujûd).The cosmos and the things and beings found in the cosmos aretaken as an outward expression of the relations that exist withinGod and between God and the cosmos. The laws that governthe things and beings of the universe are the same laws thatgovern the relations among the divine names. To know thecosmos in its full significance, we need to seek out its roots andsupports within God Himself, and these are the divine names,in a broad sense of the term. The things of the cosmos are thenames’ properties or traces. Just as the names can be rankedin degrees according to their scope, so also creatures can beranked in degrees according to their capacity to manifest theproperties of the Divine Level. Ranking in Degrees of Excellencegoes back to roots in God (Chittick 1998, xix).To a modern student of cosmology whose understanding islimited to the physical cosmos with no links to the spiritual order, thismay seem a difficult and highly subjective approach to cosmology,but those concerned with the root of existence cannot but marvel atthe penetrating insights into the nature of existence found in Ibn al-‘Arabi’s cosmological principles. The so-called Laws of Nature oftenreferred to in religion and science discourse are but one set of laws ina hierarchy of principles that govern the cosmos, which is not limitedto the physical world studied by modern science but consists of manyworlds. This is why the QurāĀn refers to God as Rabb al-‘Alamîn, theLord of the Worlds. It was mentioned in the introduction that oneof the most important aspects of the QurāĀnic view of the physicalcosmos—and the vast ecological and biological systems operative

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 115in it—is that it stands as a sign (âya) and a witness to the One whofashioned it for a purpose and for a fixed duration. Ibn al-‘Arabi’scosmology is replete with this understanding. He uses the term dalil(indicator) to refer to this aspect of the cosmos. His descriptions ofthe relationships between God, the cosmos, and humanity lead us toan understanding of the cosmos that is rooted in the central reality ofits existence, order, and functioning derived from “the Breath of theAll-Merciful” (Chittick 1998, xxvii).Ibn al-‘Arabi’s cosmology offers a vast range of intertwined ideas,which integrate various domains of knowledge into a systematicdescription of existence. There are four basic ways in which he ordersthe cosmic degrees. The first is in terms of the twenty-eight letters ofthe Arabic language, beginning with hamza, pronounced most deeplyin the throat. The other three are temporal (prior and posterior),spatial (higher and lower), and qualitative (more excellent and lessexcellent) (Chittick 1998, xxix).We cannot go into further discussion of this important aspect ofIslamic cosmology, but let us close this section with a short note on Ibnal-‘Arabi’s view of causality, for it shows how his cosmology transcendsthe distinctions and debates that had mired Muslim philosophersfor centuries in apparently inextricable discourses. Following Greekthought and terminology, many Muslim philosophers called God the“cause” (illa) of the universe and the universe God’s “effect” (ma‘ lûl).Perhaps as a result of their excessive preoccupation with these terms,Ibn al-‘Arabi sometimes calls these philosophers the “Companionsof the Causes” (Chittick 1998, 17). As for himself, he refuses tocompromise God’s independence at any level:We do not make Him a cause of anything, because the causeseeks its effect, just as the effect seeks its cause, but theIndependent is not qualified by seeking. Hence it is not correctfor Him to be a cause.The cosmos is identical with cause and the effect. I do not saythat the Real is its cause, as is said by some of the considerativethinkers, for that is the utmost ignorance of the affairs.Whoever says so does not know wujûd, nor who it is that is theExistent. You, O so-and-so, are the effect of your cause, andGod is your Creator! So understand! (Chittick 1998, 17)

116 • The Making of Islamic ScienceCosmological Doctrines of the Post-Mongol PeriodThe invasion and destruction of Baghdad by the Mongols ushered ina new era in Islamic thought and science. During this post-Mongolperiod, all four major schools of Islamic philosophy—the Peripatetic(mashsha’i), the Illuminationist (Ishraqi), the Gnostic (Irfani), and thetheological (Kalam)—continued to develop in various parts of theMuslim world. Despite the generally held view in the West, whichconsiders Islamic philosophy to have died by the blow served byal-Ghazali’s Tahafut al-falasifah (The Incoherence of the Philosophers)in all parts of the Muslim world except for Islamic Spain, where itis deemed to have survived for a short while due to Ibn Rushd andhis rebuttal of al-Ghazali, research during the last few decades hasshown the continuation of a rich discourse in many parts of theMuslim world and especially in Iran (Nasr 1997, 20). It is, therefore,not surprising that two of the most important philosophers of thepost-Mongol period—Sadr al-Din al-Shirazi (d. 1640) and HajiMulla Hadi Sabsvari (d. 1873)—were born in Iran. As mentioned inthe preceding section, both Suhrawardi and Ibn al-‘Arabi broughtPeripatetic tradition closer to the Sufi doctrines. Nasir al-Din Tusion the other hand revived Ibn Sina’s school of philosophy, and in sodoing he also opened paths for further developments in Peripateticphilosophy that were followed by other philosophers such as his friendand contemporary Najm al-Din Dabiran Katibi (who wrote a majortreatise on Peripatetic philosophy entitled Hikmat al-‘ayn (Wisdom ofthe Fountainhead), and, most notably, by Qutb al-Din Shirazi, who washimself a student and colleague of al-Tusi.The period of four centuries between the death of Ibn al-‘Arabiin 1240 and the birth of Sadr al-Din al-Shirazi, generally known asMulla Sadra, is thus not a barren period in Islamic thought but onerich in inner developments that paved the way for Mulla Sadra’s grandsynthesis of the four major schools of thought. The works of manyimportant philosophers and thinkers of these four centuries have yetto be studied in Western languages. A full picture of the intellectualactivity of these four centuries can only become apparent afterconsiderable attention has been paid to the works of such philosophersof these four centuries as Jalal al-Din Dawani, Sadr al-Din Dashtaki,Ghiyath al-Din Mansur Dashtaki, Abd al-Razaaq Kashani, and

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 117Madrassah of Mulla Sadra in Shiraz, Iran. Mulla Sadra’sTranscendent Theosophy Concerning the Four IntellectualJourneys of the Soul is one of the most important works ofIslamic philosophy.

The Mosque, the Laboratory, and the Market • 119objects which at the same time exist and are also a particularthing. (Nasr 1997, 103)Like many Muslim thinkers before him, Mulla Sadra alsodiscussed the question of the eternity of the universe versus atemporal creation in his treatise Huduth al-‘alam. This treatisediscusses creation in time based on Mulla Sadra’s doctrine oftranssubstantial motion, al-harkat al-jawhariyyah, which is one of thebasic features of his transcendent theosophy. This principle is usedby Mulla Sadra to deal with many questions related to the physicalcosmos. He believes that love is the most important and all-pervasiveprinciple of the universe, and therefore, as opposed to Ibn Sina,who denied transsubstantial motion and conceived of becoming asan external process that solely affects the accidents of things, MullaSadra “conceives of being as a graded reality which remains onedespite its gradation” (Nasr 1997, 91).The hikmat (wisdom) tradition, which achieved great heightsthrough Mulla Sadra, is “structurally a peculiar combination ofrational thinking and Gnostic intuition,” as Izutsu has described it(Sabzavari, tr. 1977, 3). This tradition remains one of the most vibrantschools of philosophy in contemporary Iran. This “spiritualizationof philosophy,” as it has been aptly called by Izutsu, originatedin the metaphysical visions of Ibn al-‘Arabi and Suhrawardi, andclearly distinguished a rational and a gnostic component in whatwas previously merely a logically construed rational discourse. Inits logical structure, its philosophical terms, and concepts it takesIbn Sina’s Peripatetic tradition as its point of departure. Its secondcomponent, namely a mystical or Gnostic experience, underliesthe whole structure of philosophizing. It is this second componentof Hikmat that makes it a keen analytic process combined with aprofound intuitive grasp of reality. Mulla Sadra had realized thatmere philosophizing that does not lead to the highest spiritualrealization is vain, and it was his belief that there is a reciprocalrelationship between mystical experience and logical thinking. ThisHikmat tradition found a new exponent in the nineteenth centuryin Mulla Hadi Sabzavari, who was to continue the work of MullaSadra. In his Metaphysics, Sabzavari points out that existence is selfevidentand all defining terms of “existence” are but explanations of

120 • The Making of Islamic Sciencethe word; they can neither be a “definition” nor a “description” ofexistence itself.The foregoing survey shows some of the inherent connectionsthat existed between Islam (the religion) and the science practiced inthe Islamic civilization. We have seen that the application of certaincontemporary frameworks of studying the relationship betweenscience and religion to Islam and science discourse often producesmisconceptions. We have also examined certain key cosmologicalschemes that emerged in Islamic civilization, and explored how theyconstrued the natural world. This discussion leads to a realizationthat there is a need to reinvestigate and reexamine certain basicnotions about this relationship on the basis of primary sources.Islamic scientific tradition was to gradually decline and eventuallydisappear. When did this decline start? Why? What was done toprevent it? These questions are discussed in the next chapter alongwith certain aspects of the transmission of science from Islamiccivilization to Europe.z

L5JIslam, Transmission, andthe Decline of Islamic ScienceIn this chapter we are broadly concerned with exploring two mainquestions: (i) What was the role of Islam in the transmission ofscience to Europe? (ii) Was Islam responsible for the decline of sciencein Islamic civilization? Both of these questions are intertwined with ahost of historical developments in Europe as well as in the Muslimworld. Both are complex. Both involve a wide range of individualsand institutions, and both have left deep marks on the subsequenthistory of Islam and science discourse. In examining these questions,we will limit our discussion to only those aspects that are directlyrelated to the role of Islam in transmission and the decline of science,though certain intertwined issues cannot be left aside in any narrativeof this fascinating chapter of human history.Civilizations in Dialogue: The Transmission of Islamic Scienceto EuropeThe perception most common in the Muslim world about thetransmission of science to Europe is the rather untenable claim thatthe Scientific Revolution of the seventeenth century was a directresult of the transmission of Islamic science to Europe. Conversely,the most common perception in the West about this transmission isthat a few Arabic works of Greek origin were translated from Arabicinto Latin, but that they were of little use for the rapidly developing

122 • The Making of Islamic Sciencescience in Europe. Both of these perceptions are erroneous; both aregeneralizations that have found their way into secondary literatureand are repeated ad nauseam; both are exaggerations withouthistorical foundation. Another common misconception arises fromcomparisons between the translation of Islamic scientific texts intoLatin and the translation movement into Arabic. These comparisonsare at best superficial, as will become clear from the followingaccount. The two events are of a different order of magnitude, tookplace under very different conditions, and yielded very differentconsequences.The movement that brought Islamic scientific and philosophicalthought to the Latin West can be divided into three phases. The firstof these three began in the late tenth century as a result of small andindividual efforts. The individual most responsible for supportingand spreading this activity was a man born of poor parents in ornear the village of Aurillac in south-central France: Gerbert ofAurillac (ca. 946–1003). Gerbert, who would rise to the Papacy in 999as Pope Sylvester II (999–1003), received a thorough education inLatin grammar at the monastery of St. Gerard in Aurillac, where heremained until 967.In that year, Borrell II, the count of Barcelona, visited themonastery and was so impressed by Gerbert that he requestedthe abbot to allow Gerbert to come to Catalan Spain for furthereducation. In Spain, Gerbert was entrusted to Atto, the bishopof Vich. It was here that Gerbert first came into contact witha mathematics far superior to anything he had learned so far.Fascinated by the Islamic mathematical tradition and Arabicnumerals, he quickly learned the use of an abacus, which he laterintroduced to Latin Europe outside Spain (Lattin 1961, 6).Gerbert’s interest in Islamic scientific manuscripts was sustainedover a long period of time, but what is more important for our bookis the information we find in his letters about the earliest period oftranslation activity from Arabic into Latin. For instance, on March25, 984, he wrote a letter to Seniofred of Barcelona (d. ca. 995), theprominent and wealthy archdeacon of the cathedral of Barcelona(also known by his nickname Lupitus or Lubetus (Lobet), in whichhe asked him to send him De Astrologia, his translation of an Arabic

Islam, Transmission, and the Decline of Islamic Science • 123text on astrology (Lattin 1961, 69). In another letter, written fromRheims in February or March 984 to Abbot Gerard of Aurillac, heasks for a book on multiplication and division translated by Josephthe Spaniard, a Mozarab who knew Arabic: “Abbot Guarin left withyou a little book, De multiplicatione et divisione numerorum, written byJoseph the Spaniard, and we both should like a copy of it” (Lattin1961, 63).These early tenth-century translations planted the seeds of whatbecame a major intellectual tradition in the next two centuries.This second phase of translation activity (eleventh to the fourteenthcenturies), produced a steady flow of Latin translations by a smallnumber of translators, among whom was a Muslim who laterconverted to Christianity and is known to us as Constantine theAfrican (fl. 1065–1085). Not much is known about his life exceptthat he was a merchant who traveled between his home in Tunisiaand southern Italy. He became interested in medicine, and afterstudying it for several years in Tunisia went to Salerno, Italy, carryingwith him a large number of Arabic books. Around 1060 he enteredthe monastery of Monte Cassino, where he stayed until his death in1087 (McVaugh 1981, 395). He translated a large number of Arabicmedical texts into Latin, claiming their authorship for himself. Histranslations hada very considerable effect upon twelfth-century Salerno. As thecore of the collection entitled Ars medicine or Articella, whichwas the foundation of much European medical instruction wellinto the Renaissance…it did not merely enlarge the sphere ofpractical competence of the Salernitan physicians; it had theadded effect of stimulating them to try to organize the newmaterial into a wider, philosophical framework. (McVaugh1981, 394)While this translation activity was in progress, the reconquestof Spain began in full force. The fall of Toledo in 1080 resulted inthe availability of an excellent library to translators. During theprevious four and a half centuries (712–1085), Tulaytulah, as Toledowas called in Arabic, had become an important center of learning inIslamic Spain. As the language of learning and culture had becomeArabic, many non-Muslim residents of Spain were fluent in Arabic.

124 • The Making of Islamic ScienceRaymond I, the new archbishop of Toledo (1126–1151), patronizedthe translation movement and gathered around him a small groupof translators headed by Archdeacon Dominico Gundislavi (orGundisalvo), a Spanish philosopher. Gundislavi also wrote a book(De divisione philosophiae) that introduced al-Farabi’s scheme ofclassification of knowledge to Europe. Another resident of Toledo,John of Seville (fl. 1133–1142), a Mozarab, translated a large numberof astrological works into Latin (see Table 5.1). Hugh of Santalla (fl.1145), an astrologer and alchemist, translated al-Biruni’s commentaryon the astronomy of al-Farghani and also translated works onastrology and divination. Mark of Toledo (fl. 1191–1216) translatedGalenic texts (Sarton 1931, vol. II, 114). Most translators were from orat least based in southern Europe, as elsewhere there was little accessto manuscripts or major interest in translation activity.Table 5.1 gives details of major translations done during thissecond phase (eleventh to the fourteenth centuries). These threecenturies saw considerable expansion of the links between theMuslim world and a new Europe emerging from the ruins of theRoman Empire through a complex process of intermingling ofpopulations, Viking settlements, and unprecedented economicgrowth. Along with the emergence of stable monarchies andpopulation explosion, there arose a chain of new schools throughoutWestern Europe with far broader aims than the previous monasteryschools had.These new schools were centered on the interests of theMaster who directed them (just like schools in Islamic civilization,which attracted students to a particular teacher whose namewas synonymous with that of the school). And just like theircounterpart in the Muslim world, these European schools werenot geographically fixed; they went where their master-teacherwent. The number of students and teachers in these new schoolsincreased rapidly and some of them became large enough torequire organization and administration, leading to the emergenceof the universities that would subsequently become home to intensescientific activity.

Islam, Transmission, and the Decline of Islamic Science • 125Table 5.1. Some Arabic scientific and philosophical works translated intoLatin between the eleventh and the thirteenth centuriesAuthor Arabic Work Latin/EnglishTitleAl-Khwarizmi Astronomical tables Ezich Elkauresmiper Athelardumbathoniensem exaribico sumptusAbu Ma‘sharIbn SinaKitab al-madkhalal-Saghir (ShorterIntroduction toAstonomy)Risala (maqala)fi-l-nafsYsagoga minorIapharismatematici inastronomicamper Adhelardumbathoniensem exArabic sumptaDe animaAl-Ghazali Maqasid al-falasifa The Aims of thePhilosophersTranslatorAdelard of Bath(fl. 1116–1142)Adelard of BathGundisalvo withIbn DawudGundisalvo withJohannesAl-Farghani ‘Ilm al-nujum De Scientia astorum John of Seville (fl.1133–1142)Abu Ma‘sharQusta binLuqaKibtab al-Madkhalal-kabir ila ‘ilmahkam al-nujumKitabl al-Fasl baynal-ruh wa-l-nafsGreat Introductionto the Science ofAstrologyDe differentiaspiritus et animeJohn of SevilleJohn of SevilleAl-Khwarizmi Algebra Algebra Robert of Chester(fl. 1140–1150)Al-KindiThe Book on theAstrolabeDe iudiciis astrorumRobert of ChesterAl-Battani Zij al-sabi De motu stellarum Plato of TivoliIbn Sina Al Qanun fi’l -tibb Canon of Medicine Gerard ofCremona (ca.1114–1187)Earlier translations of this second phase were done without ascheme or definite plan, but as translated texts began to circulatespecific needs arose for the translation of works referenced in earliertranslations. Among the greatest translators was Gerard of Cremona(d. 1187), an Italian who came to Spain in the late 1130s or early 1140s

126 • The Making of Islamic Sciencein search of Ptolemy’s Almagest. He found a copy in Toledo. Once inToledo, “seeing the abundance of books in Arabic on every subject…helearned the Arabic language, in order to be able to translate” (Lemay1981, 174). Over the next three decades, Gerard was to produce overeighty translations of scientific and philosophical texts from Arabic, nodoubt with the help of a team of assistants. These translations are notof high quality, but their importance lies in the introduction of a vastcorpus of Islamic scientific and philosophical texts to Latin scholarsand in their subsequent impact on the history of science as well as onthe discourse between Christianity and science.It is important to have a closer look at what Gerard translated,for it sheds light on the interests of Latin scholars of the time. It alsoprovides us important clues to understand the nature of subsequentdiscourse on the relationship between science and Islam on theone hand and science and Christianity on the other. Eighty-twoworks listed in the incomplete bibliography of his works preparedby his companions in Toledo can be divided into seven categories:(i) logic–three works; (ii) geometry, mathematics, optics, weights,dynamics–seventeen works; (iii) astronomy and astrology–twelveworks; (vi) philosophy–eleven works; (v) medicine–twenty-four works;(vi) alchemy–three works; (vii) geomancy and divination–four works(Lemay 1981, 173–92). Among the originally Greek works translatedfrom Arabic are the Posterior Analytics of Aristotle, Ptolemy’s Almagest,and Euclid’s Elements. Works by Muslims translated by Gerard andhis companions include al-Khwarizmi’s Algebra, al-Farabi’s ShortCommentary on Aristotle’s Prior Analytics, Banu Musa’s Geometria, al-Kindi’s De aspectibus (optics), Thabit ibn Qurra’s liber Qarastonis,twelve works on astronomy and astrology including al-Farghani’sLiber Alfagani in quibusdam collectis scientie astrorum ett radicum motuumplanetarum et est 30 differntiarum, Jabir bin Aflah’s De astronomia libriIX, and several works by al-Razi, including his Liber Almansorius, theshorter of al-Razi’s great medical works.The future European discourse on Islamic scientific traditionwas shaped to a certain extent by what was translated at this time.It is interesting to note that these translations were done at a timewhen many important contributions of the Islamic scientific andphilosophical traditions had yet to appear. It is also interesting to

Islam, Transmission, and the Decline of Islamic Science • 127The last page of Ibn Sina’s magnus opus in medicine, Al-Qanunfi’l tibb (The Canon of Medicine) which was translated into Latinby Gerard of Cremona (ca. 1114–1187) and which remained thestandard textbook of medicine in Europe until the sixteenthcentury.note that Gerard and his companions paid no attention to a manwho would become the most important Muslim philosopher forEurope and who lived close to the time of their translation activity:Ibn Rushd (d. 1198). His works were later translated in the thirteenthcentury, shortly after his death. Gerard is, nevertheless, one of themost important transmitters of knowledge from one civilization

128 • The Making of Islamic Scienceto another and is at times compared to Hunayn ibn Ishaq (d. 873),the Nestorian Christian who translated some 129 works from Greekand Syriac into Arabic and whom we have mentioned in Chapter 2.Another important aspect of this second phase of translations fromArabic into Latin is the absence of any substantial link between thetranslators of this period and the Muslim scholars and scientists wholived in the eastern parts of the Muslim world. Most of this translationactivity was based on what was available in Spain.During the thirteenth century, William of Moerbeke (fl. 1260–1286) rendered the entire Aristotelian corpus into Latin, along withmany works of Aristotle’s Muslim commentators. He also revisedolder translations and translated a number of neo-Platonic works.The most important translation for the science and religion discoursein Europe, however, was yet to come: the translations of Ibn Rushdby Michael Scot, a Scotsman who inaugurated Averroism into theEuropean tradition. Among other translations of note from thiscentury are Alfred Sareshel’s translation of the alchemical part ofIbn Sina’s al-Shifa and Michael Scot’s translation of al-Bitruji’s workon astronomy in 1217. In astronomy, the most important work of thiscentury was The Alfonsine Tables, drawn up at Toledo around 1272 byorder of the king of Castile and León, Alfonso X (d. 1284). Alfonsowas the son of Ferdinand III (d. ca. 1252), the conqueror of someof the most important cities of Muslim Spain including Cordoba,Murcia, and Seville. Alfonso’s entourage included many scholars, bothChristian and Jewish, who knew Arabic. He patronized translationsfrom Arabic into Castilian, making it a new vehicle for scientificcommunication. These new tables extended the scope of translationsfrom Arabic. Their impact on the Latin astronomical tradition shouldbe seen in the context of an already existing Islamic influence onLatin astronomy due to translations of the astronomical tables ofal-Khwarizmi and other Muslim scientists. The Alfonsine Tables tookfull advantage of the earlier translations, in particular building uponthe Toledian Tables, a compendium of Islamic astronomical tablescompiled by Said al-Andalusi and his circle and translated into Latinin the twelfth century.The Alfonsine Tables divided the year into 365 days, 5 hours, 49minutes, and 16 seconds. Once translated into Latin (in 1320s Paris)

Islam, Transmission, and the Decline of Islamic Science • 129they remained the most popular astronomical tables in Europe untillate in the sixteenth century, when they were replaced by ErasmusReinhold’s Prutenic Tables based on Copernicus’s De revolutionibusorbium coelestium (Chabás and Goldstein 2003, 243–247).One of the most important figures in Toledo translations at thetime of Alfonso’s reign was Gonzalo García Gudiel, who establishedhis own scriptorium around 1273 (Chabás and Goldstein 2003, 226).Table 5.2 lists a sampling of Arabic works translated into Castilianunder the patronage of Alfonso.Table 5.2. Some of the Arabic scientific and philosophical workstranslated into CastilianDate Arabic Title Castilian/English Translatorca. 1263 Kitab al-mi ‘raj The Book ofMuhammad’s Ladder1254 An unknown work byAbu l-Hasan ‘Ali ibnAbi l-Rijal1256 The star catalogue for964 by Abu l-Husain‘Abd al-Rahman ibn‘Umar al-Sufi1259 A treatise on the useof a celestial globewritten in the ninthcentury by Qusta ibnLuqa1259? The treatise on theastrolabe by Abul-Qasim ibn al-Samh(d. 1035), a disciple ofMaslama al-Majritica 1258A treatise ‘Ali ibnKhalaf on theconstruction anduse of a universalastronomicalinstrument usingmeridian projectionsLibro complido enlos iudizios de lasestrellasLibro de las estrellasde la ochaua esperaLibro de la alcora,also called Libro de lafaycon dell espera etde sus figuraas et desus uebrasLibro del astolabioredondoLibro de la laminauniversalAbraham of ToledoJudah ben Mosesha-CohenJudah ben Mosesha-Cohen with thehelp of GuillenArremaon DaspaJudah ben Mosesha-Cohen, incollaboration withJohan Daspa; arevised versioncompleted in 1277Book I wascompiled by Isaacben SidCompiled by Isaacben Sid

Islam, Transmission, and the Decline of Islamic Science • 131The Cordoba Mosque is an important remaining monumentof Islamic Spain (al-Andalus). It became the center oftransmission of Islamic scientific tradition to Europe duringthe eleventh to fourteenth centuries.

132 • The Making of Islamic Sciencerespects. Its scope is much wider, both geographically as well as interms of material. Instead of courts, this phase of translation activitywas increasingly based in the newly founded universities. Translatorswere now able to travel to Muslim lands other than Spain. Thetranslations from this phase are much more refined and critical. Butthe most important aspect of this phase of the translation activitywas that it gave birth to a distinct enterprise that would cast a deepshadow on the West’s relationship and understanding of Islam andMuslims: Orientalism. Because of its importance, this third phase oftranslation activity deserves more detailed exploration and a context.European ContextIn order to holistically understand the three phases of Europeantranslation activity it is important to keep in mind that the secondphase of translation activity took place in the backdrop of the lossof al-Andalus by Muslims through its reconquest by the Latin Westand, more important, of the Crusades. Both events contributed tothe emergence of a very unfavorable image of Islam and Muslimsin the European mind. Islam, for most Europeans of that time, wasa dangerous, hostile, and even pagan cult. This image was builtthrough another translation movement that began somewhat priorto the translation of scientific texts and focused instead on Islamictexts, transmitting to the learned Latin circles of the Middle Ages (ca.800–1400) an account of Islam’s message and the life of its Prophet.The transmitters of this information lived close to Muslims and hadaccess to Islam’s two primary sources, the QurāĀn and Hadith.The image of Islam prevalent in the medieval West emergedon the basis of the works of these writers. In many writings of thisperiod, the Prophet Muhammad appears as an idol worshipped bySaracens; in others he is depicted as a magician; in still others he isa possessed man. In the epics of the Crusades, the Prophet of Islamappears as a heathen god (Trude 1993, 382). These popular texts hadan audience not trained in theological intricacies, and their authorsand minstrels used imaginative powers to exaggerate and hyperbolefor their readership; this resulted in such gross misrepresentationsas the infamous Mary Magdalene from the Digby cycle. An amazing

Islam, Transmission, and the Decline of Islamic Science • 133characteristic of the portrayal of the Prophet Muhammad in thepopular texts of the Middle Ages is the consistent negative image inlanguages as far removed from each other as Old Icelandic, German,and English. This is because the original material for the populartexts was found in common Latin or Arabic sources. In popularEnglish literature, for instance, Prophet Muhammad was representedas a renegade cardinal in Piers Plowman of William Langland (1362);in John Lydgate’s The Fall of the Princes (1438) he appears as a hereticand false prophet in the story Machomet the false Prophete.As the intellectual milieu of Europe at the time of the translationof Islamic scientific texts was thus influenced by this paralleltranslation movement, the Crusades shaped the social outlook ofEurope of the time. They began when Emperor Alexius I, havingsuffered a defeat by the Abbasid army, appealed to Pope UrbanII for help. He requested that the Pope undertake a pilgrimage toliberate Jerusalem from the Muslims. In 1095, Urban II gave the callfor the holy war and the Papal battle cry Deus vult! (“God wills it!”)resounded throughout Europe. Knights, merchants, and ordinarysoldiers marched toward Jerusalem. In 1099, Godfrey of Bouilloncaptured the city; his men massacred almost the entire Muslim andJewish population of the holy city. The incident shocked the Muslimworld but did not pose a serious threat to the vast Abbasid Empire.In 1187 Salah al-Din (d. 1193) recaptured Jerusalem. The Crusades,however, continued until the end of the thirteenth century, when theydegenerated into intra-Christian wars.The Crusades are more important for their effect on theperception of Islam and Muslims in the West than their militaryvictories. For almost two centuries, mesmerized by the Papal battlecry, allured by promises of rich booty and heavenly rewards, anddriven by the attraction of the holy city, thousands of men marchedthrough various towns and cities on their way to Jerusalem. This hadan invigorating effect on the popular mind, which saw Muslims asthe barbaric infidel. It was also during this time that the averageEuropean learned the most horrible details about Islam and itsProphet in a climate already charged with hatred and mistrust.It was in this environment that the earliest polemics against Islamwere written in Europe, based in part on information received from

134 • The Making of Islamic Scienceal-Andalus. The purpose of these writings was to justify the “holywar.” Muslims appear in these writings as polytheistic, polygamous,promiscuous, worshippers of Muhammad, and wine-drinkers. Theseimages passed from generation to generation and their remnants arestill reflected in certain perceptions about Islam and Muslims heldin the West.The European Renaissance attempted to rebuild a civilizationbased on its antiquity. This incessant return to the past is apparenteverywhere—in art, in the sciences, in poetry. At the same time,European intellectuals, writers, scientists, and artists of this perioddeveloped an intense hatred for Islam, its Prophet, and his family.Dante Alighieri (1265–1321), for instance, placed Ibn Sina andIbn Rushd in Limbo, in the First Circle of Hell, with the greatestnon-Christian thinkers—Electra, Aeneas, Caesar, Aristotle, Plato,Orpheus, and Cicero—where they must live without hope of seeingGod, in perpetual desire, though not in torment (Dante 1971, CantoIV: 142–144). But he placed the Prophet and his son-in-law, Ali,among a group of “sowers of scandal and schism,” whose mutilatedand bloody bodies, ripped open and entrails spilling out, bemoantheir painful lot: “See how Mohomet is deformed and torn!/In frontof me, and weeping, Ali walks,/his face cleft from his chin up to thecrown” (Dante 1971, Canto XXVIII: 31–33).The first Latin paraphrase of the QurāĀn, made by Robertof Ketton at the behest of Peter the Venerable, Abbot of Cluny,was completed in 1143. (It still exists with the autograph of thetranslator in the Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal in Paris.) An Italianversion was published by Andrea Arrivabene in 1547, and “thoughits author claims that it is made directly from the Arabic, it is clearlya translation or paraphrase of Robert of Ketton’s text, publishedby Bibliander. Arrivabene’s version was used for the first Germantranslation made by Solomon Schweigger, which in turn formed thebasis of the first Dutch translation, made anonymously and issued in1641” (Pearson 1986, 431). Most of the subsequent translations of theQurāĀn in various European languages were derivative products ofthese works (which were themselves not accurate in the first place),and it was not until the second quarter of the twentieth century thatMuslims produced their own translations of the QurāĀn in European

Islam, Transmission, and the Decline of Islamic Science • 135languages. With this background in mind, let us now examine thethird phase of translation.The Third Wave of TranslationsThe sixteenth and seventeenth centuries have been described as the“golden age of Arabic studies in Europe” (Feingold 1996, 441). Duringthese two centuries, a third wave of translations emerged along witha more serious interest in things Islamic. This was institutionalizedin the form of several professorships of Arabic founded in Europeanuniversities. During these two centuries, “scores of scholars madetheir way East in search of instruction in the language or for Arabicmanuscripts—thousands of which made their way to Europe—andvarious publishers as well as individual scholars acquired Arabic typein anticipation of a significant publication enterprise” (Feingold 1996,441). The translation activity of this period produced annotatedtranslations of Arabic texts, often along with the original Arabic.This marked interest in primary sources, while indicative of a mentalattitude formed by reformation and humanism (as noted by Feingold),was also entangled in the intellectual and theological debates thatproliferated in Europe during the sixteenth and the seventeenthcenturies. In any case, through patronage, internal politics of theEuropean academic community, and necessity, the study of Arabicdid become indispensable to the late Renaissance humanists, whoapplied it to gain access to their cherished classical texts preservedand enriched by the Muslim scholars. Although this phase of thetransmission of knowledge from the Islamic civilization to Europeremains least studied, it clearly shows great interest—even zeal—inlearning Arabic and in acquiring works of Islamic tradition as late asthe seventeenth century. The teaching of Arabic became an integralpart of the academic curricula through the establishment of chairs,research programs, and several ambitious projects.Two new factors contributed to the renewed interest in the studyof Arabic during the sixteenth and the seventeenth centuries: hostileinteraction between the Ottomans and Europe and the growth ofinterest among Western Europeans in establishing contacts withthe Eastern Churches, which used Arabic, Greek, Syriac, Turkish,and Coptic as their liturgical and/or vernacular languages (Toomer

136 • The Making of Islamic Science1996, 7–15). The study of Arabic was thus pursued for two motives:the acquisition of scientific and philosophical texts, and for Christianmissionary and apologetic activities. France had the distinction ofbeing the first European country to establish formal relations withthe Ottoman Empire and to institute formal instruction in Arabic,both under King François I. Many influential scholars encouragedthe study of Arabic in public lectures. The chairs of geometry andastronomy established at Oxford in 1619 required knowledge ofIslamic scientific tradition as an essential qualification. A successionof European scholars produced a sustained flow of translationactivity during these two centuries. More important, however, is thefact that these scholars were now themselves going to the Muslimworld to perfect their Arabic and collect new manuscripts and firsthandinformation about Islam and Muslims. Thus Bedwell, Selden,Bainbridge, Pococke, and Greaves—among others—considerablyincreased European knowledge about Islam and its intellectualtradition, including the natural sciences.The nature of European interest as well as European perceptionof Islam and Muslims was, however, going to change drasticallyin the seventeenth century. This was primarily due to the fact thatEuropean scientific and philosophical traditions were now able tosurpass the received material from Islam. This radical change inattitude was, however, broader in nature and not confined to scientificlearning. Islam and Muslims in general were going to be relegated tosecond-class status—a position that remains entrenched in Westernscholarship to this day. Numerous factors contributed to this change.Arabic texts were no more marvels of wisdom and knowledge, as JohnGreaves’s 1646 complaint to Pococke indicates:To speak the truth, those maps, which shall be made out ofAbulfeda, will not be so exact, as I did expect; as I have foundby comparing some of them with our modern and best charts.In his description of the Red Sea, which was not far from him,he is most grossely mistaken; what may we think of placesremoter? However, there may be good use made of the book forArabian writers. (Feingold 1996, 448)A similar sentiment can be discerned from a letter of RobertHuntington, written from Aleppo on April 1, 1671, to John Locke:

Islam, Transmission, and the Decline of Islamic Science • 137“The Country is miserably decay’d, and hath lost the Reputationof its Name, and mighty stock of Credit it once had for EasternWisedome and learning; It hath followed the Motion of the Sun andis Universally gone Westward” (Toomer 1996, v).By the end of the seventeenth century, new publications hadstarted to appear on the basis of previously translated Latin texts,which provided foundations for the emergence of Orientalism.As European science surpassed Islamic scientific tradition, thepropagandists of the new science began to single out Arabs asharbingers of scholasticism, mere imitators of the Greeks, whoselearning was derivative and irrelevant. “The sciences which wepossess come for the most part from the Greeks,” wrote FrancisBacon (1561–1626) in Novum Organum, “for what has been added byRoman, Arabic, or later writers is not much nor of much importance;and whatever it is, it is built on the foundations of Greek discoveries”(Bacon 1905, 275). Bacon’s verdict was to become entrenched insubsequent centuries. For him, “only three revolutions and periodsof learning can properly be reckoned; one among the Greeks, thesecond among the Romans, and the last among us, that is to say, thenations of Western Europe, and to each of these hardly two centuriescan be assigned. The intervening ages of the world, in respect ofany rich or flourishing growth of sciences, were unprosperous. Forneither the Arabians, nor the Schoolmen need be mentioned; who inthe intermediate times rather crushed the sciences with a multitudeof treatises, than increased their weight” (Bacon 1905, 279). Bacon’sverdict has been repeated time and again and continues to be themain thesis of most mainstream literature on Islamic scientifictradition. “George Starkey criticized all of the Arabic writers becauseof their reliance on Galen and opined that ‘Avicenna was useless inthe light of practical experience’” (Greaves 1969, 90).By the turn of the eighteenth century, not only the scientificlearning of Muslims but Muslims themselves were the subject ofjudgments: “It is certain that the Arabs were not a learned Peoplewhen they over-spread Asia,” wrote William Watton (1666–1727), “sothat when afterwards they translated the Grecian Learning into theirown Language, they had very little of their own, which was not takenfrom those Fountains” (Watton 1694, 140).

138 • The Making of Islamic ScienceThis tradition of censure first appeared among the humanistsand was built upon by the historians of philosophy in the seventeenthcentury. Leonhart Fuchs demanded the liberation of medicine “fromthe Arabic dung dressed with the honey of Latinity”; then he went onto state,Frontispiece of Johannes Hevelius’s Selenographia (1647),showing Ibn al-Haytham (d.1040) on the left and Galileo (1564–1642) on the right as two representatives of science. © History ofScience Collections, University of Oklahoma Libraries.

Islam, Transmission, and the Decline of Islamic Science • 139I declare my implacable hatred for the Saracens and as long asI live shall never cease to fight them. For who can tolerate a pastand its ravings among mankind any longer—except those whowish for the Christian world to perish altogether. Let us thereforereturn to the sources and draw from them the pure andunadulterated water of medical knowledge. (Walter 1977, 384)In sum, initially material translated from the Islamic scientific andphilosophical traditions was deemed necessary for the development ofscience in Medieval Europe. Later a change took place in Europeanattitude toward Islamic scientific tradition. The colonization of theMuslim world also contributed toward European attitudes towardIslam and its tradition of learning, including the sciences. Thiscolonizer–colonized relationship also affected European attitudestoward Islam and Muslims. In the meanwhile, the Muslim world itselfwas going through basic internal changes that drastically weakenedthe Islamic scientific tradition and finally choked it altogether. Thenext section explores this process of withering.Islam and the Decline of ScienceSince this book is mainly concerned with the relationship betweenIslam and science, we will limit discussion on the historical demiseof Islamic scientific tradition to the question mentioned at thebeginning of the chapter: was Islam responsible for the decline ofscience in Islamic civilization? To explore this question, it is necessaryto examine certain related questions: What is meant by the declineof Islamic scientific tradition? When did it take place? Where? Didit take place all across the Muslim world at the same time or did ithappen in stages? Did all branches of science suffer the same fate atthe same time or was it a stepwise process?These questions have of course been asked by historians of science.The answers vary depending on the perspective taken by the authoras well as his or her personal inclinations, ideological commitments,and general attitude toward Islam. The perspective and personalpreferences can sometimes even alter the question. Thus, insteadof looking into the process of decline of Islamic scientific tradition,some scholars have tended to overshadow this question with another:

140 • The Making of Islamic ScienceWhy did Muslim scientists not produce a scientific revolution like thatwhich took place in Europe? This formulation radically changes theinquiry, for now the enterprise of science in Islam is being examinedagainst a preset benchmark belonging to another civilization. Evenin formulations where this benchmark is not so obvious, it oftenremains just below the surface. Perhaps this is unavoidable or evennatural, because Islamic scientific tradition immediately preceded theemergence of the Scientific Revolution in Europe.To begin with, we must ask: what is actually meant by the declineof a scientific tradition? Obviously it is not something like the deathof an individual, which happens at eleven in the morning on the firstday of the fifth month of a certain year. What we should be lookingfor is, therefore, a period of time during which the enterprise ofscience over a large area declined. It also means that this period oftime cannot be identical for all regions of the Muslim world. After all,we are dealing with an enterprise that had different local patrons andinstitutions in different regions of the Muslim world. It also followsthat we must ask: If this decay and decline was a slow process over acertain period of time, were there any attempts to cure the malady? Ifyes, what were they? Who made them? What was the role of religionin this process? Given that science—any science—does not exist inisolation; it follows, then, that we must inquire about intellectual,social, economic, and political conditions of the Muslim worldduring the period of decline and attempt to see certain relationshipsbetween these broad conditions and science. We cannot do justice tothese questions without the discovery, annotation, and publication ofa large number of manuscripts pertaining to the social, economic,and political situation during the period of decline. Nor can we beginto formulate any theory of decline in the absence of a rigorouslydocumented history of the Islamic scientific tradition.Answers have been provided, often with commanding authority,despite the lack of fully documented source material. These answersvary, but most have a common denominator in that they trace themain reason for both the lack of a Scientific Revolution in Islamiccivilization as well as for the demise of its own scientific enterpriseto Islam itself. This perspective originated in Europe and has nowbecome the mainstay of Western scholarship on Islamic scientific

Islam, Transmission, and the Decline of Islamic Science • 141Imam Square in Isfahan (Iran) is a fine example of the vigorof Islamic scientific tradition during the Safavi period. MasjidImam displays many examples of a high degree of scientific andtechnological knowledge. Designed by Shaykh Baha’i, the mosquehas one specific spot inside the large prayer area from wheresound resonates throughout the mosque.

142 • The Making of Islamic Sciencetradition. The general acceptance granted this answer makesobligatory new work devoted to carefully examining the evidenceprovided for this answer. This is an unpleasant duty, for it burdensthe writer with the task of asking the jury to reopen the case after averdict has already been pronounced.When did the Decline Take Place?The existing literature on dating the decline of Islamic scientifictradition mention dates that differ not by years or decades but bycenturies. When Edward Sachau translated al-Biruni’s monumentalChronology of Ancient Nations in 1879, he marked the tenth centuryas the “the turning point in the history of the spirit of Islam,” andmade al-Ash‘ari and al-Ghazali the culprits: “But for Al Ash‘ari andAl Ghazali the Arabs might have been a nation of Galileos, Keplers,and Newtons” (al-Biruni, tr. 1879, x). In the 1930s and 1940s, whenGeorge Sarton wrote his monumental work, An Introduction to theHistory of Science, he set the eleventh century as the end of the vigor ofthe Islamic scientific tradition, with the twelfth century and to a lesserextent the thirteenth century as the centuries of transition of thatvigor to Europe (Sarton 1931, vol. 2, 131–48). But within two decadesof the publication of his work, the discovery of new texts pushed thisboundary further, and eventually the entire question of dating thedecline had to be recast.What we know now allows us to say with confidence that the workof astronomers and mathematicians such as Athir al-Din al-Abhari(d. ca. 1240), Mu’ayyad al-Din al-Urdi (d. 1266), Nasir al-Din al-Tusi(d. 1274), Qutb al-Din al-Shirazi (d. 1311), and Ibn al-Shatir (d. 1375)cannot be discounted as isolated examples of individual scientistspursuing first-rate science in the thirteenth and the fourteenthcenturies. Similarly, the work of al-Jazari (d. ca. 1205) in mechanics, ofIbn al-Nafis (d. 1288) in medicine, and of Ghiyath al-Din al-Kashi (d.1429) in astronomy are testimonies to a living and vibrant scientifictradition as late as the fifteenth century. In addition, we have newevidence from studies on Islamic scientific instrumentation whichprovides an altogether different methodology for understanding thequestion of decline, as David King has recently shown by his study

Islam, Transmission, and the Decline of Islamic Science • 143of astronomical instruments, which were being made of the highestcaliber in Iran in the first decades of the eighteenth century (King1999, xiii). These examples can be multiplied to include many otherscientists and instruments.Interestingly, one view on decline implicitly suggests that therewas, in fact, no such thing as decline of the Islamic scientific tradition,because no such tradition ever existed. All that Islamic civilizationdid, the advocates of this view argue, was to “host” the Greek traditionit received through the translation movement for three centuries,during which science failed to take roots in the Muslim world becauseof fierce opposition from religious scholars. Greek science was thentransferred to Europe, where it found its natural home and blossomedto become modern science. We have already dealt with this view inChapters 1 and 2. A variant of this extreme view is the “marginalitythesis”—cogently formulated by A. I. Sabra (1987)—which limits thepractice of natural sciences in Islamic civilization to a small groupof scientists who had no social, emotional, spiritual, or cultural tieswith Islamic polity and who practiced their science in isolation.While Sabra has attempted to show “the falsity of the marginalitythesis…by offering a description of an alternative picture—onewhich shows the connections with cultural factors and forces, therebyexplaining (or proposing to explain) not only the external career ofscience and philosophy in Islam, but at least some of their inherentcharacteristics, possibilities and limitations” (Sabra 1994, 230), hisrefutation remains limited to a “few general remarks.” But a moreserious problem with this refutation is its acceptance of the “two-trackthesis,” which is itself the cornerstone of the marginality hypothesisSabra tries to refute. The two-track thesis views the Islamic scientifictradition in opposition to—or at least in competition with—what itcalls the Islamic religious sciences. The mainstay of these argumentsis phrases such as “sciences of the ancients,” which sometimes occurin certain Islamic texts.What came into the main currents of Islamic thought fromoutside was received into the Islamic intellectual tradition with criticalappraisal and sorting; all living traditions do this. The problem ariseswhen one construes the arrival of the new sciences as if it were arrival

144 • The Making of Islamic Scienceen masse, like some kind of single body, which met severe oppositionfrom the upholders of traditional Islam.The Greek scientific tradition was translated into Arabic over aperiod of three centuries. This process involved numerous influentialpersons who had diverse temperaments, racial and intellectualbackgrounds, and reasons for their involvement in this task. Thetranslation movement did not solely bring Greek science but alsobrought Indian and Persian scientific data and theories into Arabic.Whatever came into Islamic tradition went through several levels oftransformation, ranging from instant linguistic to more fundamentaland substantial transformations of content and its metaphysicalunderpinnings. Thus, to construe the Islam and science relationshipas a case of an imaginary Islamic orthodoxy versus a small group ofscientists is to distort historical data.Returning to the question of dating decline, it seems best to lookat individual branches of science and different regions of the Muslimworld, for even a cursory glance at the scientific data indicates thatdifferent branches of science had different high periods and declines.Astronomy flourished at the beginning of science in the Islamictradition, went through a static period, and then burst once moreonto the forefront. Alchemy had initial energy and then remainedunchanged for several centuries. Mathematics developed steadilythroughout the eight hundred years, as did geography and geology.Most of all, what needs to be recognized is that we simply do not asyet have enough source material to pass any conclusive judgment.We cannot pronounce a general death sentence to all branches ofscience in all regions of the Muslim world at a specific date. The needis to carefully study available data (with the understanding that we donot possess all manuscripts and instruments) pertaining to differentbranches of natural science in different regions of the Muslim world,look at the evidence from within each branch of science to determineits high and low points of productivity, and then categorize a timeperiod during which its study declined. This is a task for historiansof science who have adequate linguistic and scientific expertise. Eventhen this judgment will be provisional until a substantial number ofnew manuscripts have been studied, for, as King has pointed out, sofar we only know of about 1000 Muslim scientists who worked between

Islam, Transmission, and the Decline of Islamic Science • 145Ali Qapu Palace in Imam Square, Isfahan, Iran, was the officialresidence of the Safavid king, Shah Abbas. The entire old city wasvisible from the roof of the palace. The large pool on the roofterraceof the palace was fed through clay pipes from neighboringmountains.

146 • The Making of Islamic ScienceLutfullah Mosque, Isfahan, Iran, was the private mosque of the Safavidrulers. It was connected with the palace through an undergroundtunnel.eighth and the eighteenth centuries; there are thousands more aboutwhom we have no information or of whom we merely know the namesand their works’ titles. There are over 200,000 manuscripts in Iranalone, of which about three-quarters are as yet uncatalogued. “In1994,” King writes, “during my research on the first world-map, theindex to a 21 volume catalogue of over 8,000 manuscripts in thepublic library of Âyâtallah al-Uzma Ma‘rashi Najafi in Qum landedon my desk. There are over 400 titles relating to mathematics andastronomy, including some of the works hitherto thought to be lost”(King 1999, 4, n. 4 and 5). King’s book alone cites 9,002 instruments,over 80 manuscripts, and 38 pages of bibliography.The “Why” QuestionThe “why” question is much harder to answer. Existing literatureabout the causes of decline of science in Islamic civilization tells usthat it was due to (i) opposition by “Islamic orthodoxy”; (ii) a bookwritten by Abu Hamid al-Ghazali; (iii) the Mongol invasion ofBaghdad in 1258; (iv) the lack of institutional support for science;(v) the disappearance of patrons; or (vi) some inherent flaw in Islam

Islam, Transmission, and the Decline of Islamic Science • 147itself. This puzzling array of causes—though the list is by no meanscomplete—has been cited in respectable academic publications ina decisive, authoritative manner, with citations and references tosupport these claims. Yet none of this advances our understandingof this complex question; all we have is opinions of various authorssupported with selective evidence often removed from its context.Those who wish to examine the question of decline in relation tothe Scientific Revolution further complicate the matter by readingfuture developments back into history. Given this situation, the mostimportant task for a new work of the present kind is to attempt toclear existing confusion and point to the possible areas of futureresearch that can provide a more satisfactory answer to the questionof decline of science in Islamic civilization.Prevalent Views on the Decline of Science in IslamicCivilizationThe architectonics of much of the Western Academic writings dictatea framework in which most new works are based on previous works.When new ideas arise, they arise due to a quantum leap in someone’sunderstanding of the subject, or as refutations of existing ideas.In the case of Islam in general, and Islam and science discoursein particular, such quantum leaps have been almost nonexistent.Thus, what we have is an intolerable repetition, always going back toGoldziher’s 1916 formulation. Here is an example.“During the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, Islamic sciencewent into decline; by the fifteenth century, little was left. How did thiscome about?” asks David Lindberg in his 1992 book, The Beginnings ofWestern Science. While he admits “not enough research has been doneto permit us to trace these developments with confidence…severalcausal factors can be identified” (Lindberg 1992, 180). The first factoris none other than what Goldziher identified in 1916: “conservativereligious forces.” The second is the “debilitating warfare, economicfailure, and the resulting loss of patronage” without which “thesciences were unable to sustain themselves” and the third is, onceagain, a repeat of Goldziher’s basic thesis: “In assessing this collapse,we must remember that at an advanced level the foreign sciences hadnever found a stable institutional home in Islam, that they continued

148 • The Making of Islamic Scienceto be viewed with suspicion in conservative religious quarters, andthat their utility (especially as advanced disciplines) may not haveseemed overpowering” (Lindberg 1992, 181).Cohen in his The Scientific Revolution: A Historical Inquiry first tellsus, “the upshot of all this is that, in 1300, the world of Islam lookedquite different from three centuries previously” (Cohen 1994, 408).His proofs come from an essay by J. J. Saunders, which in turns leadsus back to Goldziher:The free, tolerant, inquiring and ‘open’ society of Omayyad,Abbasid and Fatimid days had given place, under the impactof the devastating barbarian invasions and economic decline,to a narrow, rigid and ‘closed’ society in which the progress ofsecular knowledge was slowly stifled. (Saunders 1963, 701–20)Saunders adds further that “no more borrowings took place fromthe world outside Islam; Hellenistic philosophy now came to be seenas a danger to the faith. All this was codified in writing by al-Ghazali,and Ibn Rushd’s defence of the awâil sciences, one century later,failed to carry conviction” (Saunders 1963, 408). Even ignoring theunmistakable Goldziherism (awâil sciences versus Islam as well as al-Ghazali against science), there are conceptual problems as well. Forexample, Saunders’ prognosis above would have Islamic civilizationkeep on borrowing from the world outside Islam even after the threehundred years old translation movement had exhausted availableoutside sources!There is a long history of such texts, almost all of which werewritten in the twentieth century. Some of these works have becomesegues to other works merely because they are more exhaustive andhave a smattering of Arabic words spread throughout the text, givingthe impression of being the work of Arabists. One such is The Riseof Early Modern Science: Islam, China and the West, the 1993 book ofAmerican sociologist Toby Huff.Huff constructed a more comprehensive framework for his thesis,which however ultimately makes the familiar claim that there issomething inherently flawed in Islam as far as science is concerned;science therefore could not flourish in Islam, and Muslims did notproduce a Scientific Revolution. To construct his arguments, Huffidentified four factors from within the framework of sociology of

Islam, Transmission, and the Decline of Islamic Science • 149science used in the West and applied them both to Islamic scientifictradition and European civilization, to show why the ScientificRevolution took place in Europe and not in the Muslim world. Thesefour factors are as follows: the role of the scientist; the social normsof science; the common elements of scientific communities; and thecomparative, historical, and civilizational study of science. The firstfactor is identified with the work of Joseph Ben-David; the second isan extension of Max Weber’s 1949 book The Methodology of the SocialSciences; the third builds on the work of Thomas Kuhn, resultingin the idea of paradigms; the fourth proposes a comprehensiveapproach that calls “for going beyond Max Weber” and that takesinto consideration such works as Joseph Needham’s monumentalstudy Science and Civilization in China (Huff 1993, 14–16).Armed with this framework, Huff sets off to study “The problemof Arabic science” in the second chapter of his book. Here is his initialcasting:The problem of Arabic science has at least two dimensions.One concerns the failure of Arabic science to give birth tomodern science; the other concerns the apparent decline andretrogression of scientific thought and practice in Arabic-Islamic civilization after the thirteenth century. (Huff 1993, 45)Judgment is already passed before any arguments and proofs areadvanced; thereafter, Huff attempts to show the inherent flaws ofIslam by a backwards construction of all the factors needed for thegrowth of science—all based on the conditions prevailing in Europeduring and after the Scientific Revolution. The foregone conclusionis that science can flourish only and only if these conditions arepresent in a civilization; these conditions were not present in theIslamic civilization; therefore science did not flourish. After thisthe only remaining task for the sociologist is to prove that theseconditions did not prevail in the Islamic civilization because Islamdid not allow them.Evidence for this is culled from sources already in use byOrientalists, including the customary reliance on Goldziher. On thequestion of the dating of decline, Huff first identifies the thirteenthcentury, then advances this date by a whole century (Huff 1993, 48).Later he eulogizes “achievements of the Arabic science” in various

150 • The Making of Islamic Sciencefields, only to return to revisit Goldziher’s views: Arabic science camevery close to a modern scientific revolution, but did not go “the lastmile” because that “metaphysical transition would have, of course,forced an intellectual break with traditional Islamic cosmology asunderstood by the religious scholars, the ‘ulema’” (Huff 1993, 60).The reasons advanced for the failure of “Arabic science” to makethe final leap are then postulated in the context of philosophical,religious, and legal social roles in the medieval period. Finally we aregiven the answer in Goldziherian terms: “In general, the structure ofthought and sentiment in medieval Islam was such that the pursuit ofthe rational or ancient sciences was widely considered to be a taintedenterprise” (Huff 1993, 68).One can keep citing text after such text ad nauseam but this addsnothing to our understanding. A major problem with all such works istheir inability to explain why science flourished for so long in Islamiccivilization in the presence of the so-called Islamic orthodoxy and allthe “internal factors” identified by Huff and others. These “internalfactors” were of course already present when the Islamic civilizationgave birth to and nourished its scientific tradition. It is unreasonableto think that the Islamic legal system, which came into existence inthe seventh century (before the emergence of the scientific tradition),would first allow a scientific tradition to flourish for eight centuriesand then suddenly become an impediment to the emergence of a“neutral zone of scientific inquiry in which a singular set of universalstandards” could be applied.Recently there has appeared a new kind of response to such workswithin the broad field of the history of science. This more reflectiveresponse has delivered a final blow to Goldziherism and has thepotential to provide us more fruitful tools for understanding thenature of scientific enterprise in Islam. One such work is the 1996paper on mathematical sciences in Islam from a cultural perspectiveby the Canadian historian of mathematics, J. L. Berggren. Berggrenhas expanded the customary approach of a historian of science toexamine some of the arguments that Goldziher and his followershave advanced. He states that when we look at cultural factors in thegrowth of a scientific tradition, a problem arises because “there arecultural factors that condition our thought, not the least of which is

Islam, Transmission, and the Decline of Islamic Science • 151the fact that we do so as members of a civilization whose mathematicaldevelopment depended importantly on the contributions of themedieval Islamic civilization” (Berggren 1996, 266). In such studies,judgments passed on the scientific achievements of a previouscivilization are invariably based on the developments in modernscience. This creates historiographic problems and entails the dangerof unconsciously slipping from the historical fact into a Whiggishview of history, as if the final purpose of the cultivation of sciencein the other civilization was merely to create modern science. “Thisapproach has had two quite opposite, but equally regrettable, results,”says Berggren:The first is a treatment of medieval Islam as a civilizationdeserving of attention only for its role as a channel throughwhich the great works of the Greeks were carried safely to theeager minds of the European Renaissance. The emphasis fallson the two great periods of translations, that into Arabic in theninth century and that into Latin in the twelfth and thirteenthcenturies, and the developments of the intervening centuriesprovide little more than a series of anecdotes about one curiousresult or another that was proved by an occasional great figure.The second result of this Whiggish attitude is a selective andtendentious reading of medieval Arabic texts to show howIslamic science prefigured that of modern times…it wouldbe invidious to cite contemporary examples of either of theseapproaches—and of little interest to cite earlier examples—andI shall only observe that both of these results, which onthe surface seem to place such different values on Islamiccivilization, should concur in valuing it only insofar as it servedends not its own; this is hardly surprising, since both aremotivated by a fundamental interest not in the past but in thepresent. (Berggren 1996, 266–67)There is yet another perspective on the question of decline,again from within the history of science. Here the approach is toexamine the nature of science in Islamic civilization from within itsown framework and see where it could have gone. What possibilitieswere there for different branches of science within the framework oftheir fields? Aydin Sayili appended a 24-page appendix to his The

152 • The Making of Islamic ScienceObservatory in Islam with the title “The Causes of Decline of ScientificWork in Islam” in which he has questioned the basic assumption—implied in most works dealing with the cause of decline of science—that “left to itself, science would progress more or less automaticallyand that its decline would have to be brought about by definite forces,would have to be imposed by outside factors” (Sayili 1960, 408).We are left with a puzzle. The enterprise of science in Islamiccivilization did decline and eventually disappeared. So far, historians,sociologists, and orientalists have not produced any satisfactoryanswer to the question that naturally comes to mind—why? This isa compelling question; everyone writing on the subject is obligedto respond. What has been said, however, remains a regurgitationof what has already been said, save a few genuine insights that haveyielded only partial answers. This is not a book that can undertakea more detailed inquiry on this question. It is, however, useful topoint out that the question of decline of science in Islamic civilizationcannot be separated from the overall intellectual, economic, social,and political condition of the Muslim world at the time of decline.As such, this inquiry is actually a subset of a much broader inquirypertaining to the internal dynamics of Islamic civilization during theseventeenth and the eighteenth centuries.For our purpose, we can mark the seventeenth century as thedividing line between two very different kinds of Islam and sciencediscourses. The “old discourse” was based on an understanding ofscience that had emerged from within the Islamic worldview, andeven the tensions, heated exchanges, and long-standing debateswere reflective of this fact. The “new” Islam and science debates thatemerged in the eighteenth century totally transformed the basic termsof discourse. This new discourse is the subject of the next chapter.z

L6JIslam and Modern Science:The Colonial Era (1800–1950)The Background to the Emergence of aNew Discourse on Islam and ScienceMost general accounts of the Islamic scientific tradition as well asthose dealing with the relationship between Islam and science focuseson Baghdad, or the “City of Peace,” as the round city of Caliph al-Mansur was officially called. This is not without reason; after all, thefabled city, established by the victorious Abbasid Caliph on the siteof an ancient village, planned by four eminent architects, and builtby 100,000 workers and craftsmen over a period of four years (762 to766) was the intellectual capital of the world for five centuries. Withthe unconditional surrender of Caliph al-Mustasim to Hülegü, theMongol warlord, on February 10, 1258, Baghdad lost its glory. TheMongol victory was accompanied by the indiscriminate killing ofan estimated 800,000 to two million inhabitants, the destruction ofall major public buildings, including shrines, mosques, madrassas,and palaces, and an uprooting of intellectual life. By the end of thatcentury of destruction and decay, however, Islamic scientific traditionhad already found a new home in other lands of Islam, such aspresent-day Turkey, Syria, Egypt, and Iran. By the middle of the nextcentury, two major branches of Mongols—the Golden Horde andthe Chagatays of Transoxania—had themselves converted to Islam,providing patronage to scientists and scholars in their own newly builtmadrassas and observatories.

154 • The Making of Islamic ScienceThe reconfiguration of the Muslim world in the post-Mongolera would eventually give rise to three powerful empires: the Safavi(1135–1722), the Indian Timuri (1274–1857), and the Ottoman (1343–1924). These empires extended over a vast area and were extremelyrich and resourceful. They patronized the arts and sciences and viedagainst each other to attract the best minds of the time. In addition,several other smaller states and dynasties supported science. Yet,none of these empires was able to compete with the developments inscience that were taking place after the fifteenth century in Europe.When they did realize the enormous military and economic benefitsEuropeans had reaped with their science and technology, it wasalready too late; better-trained European armies, equipped withsuperior weapons, were already knocking at their doors.The rapidity with which the situation changed for Muslims isevident from the fact that at the beginning of the eighteenth century,the entire Middle East, a large part of Africa, the whole middle beltof Asia, and the Malayan archipelago were under Muslim control,but by the end of that fateful century, a large part of this territoryhad come under Russian, British, French, Portuguese, and Dutchinfluence or direct control; by the middle of the nineteenth century,there was nothing left of the power, might, and splendor of the oldMuslim world. It is against this background that the new Islam andscience discourse must be viewed.In addition to the developments within the Muslim world, thenew Islam and science discourse was influenced by the enormouschanges that took place in Europe through the application of newlydiscovered scientific knowledge. The work of Isaac Newton (1642–1727) made a tremendous impact. Two centuries of European sciencefound a new synthesis: the natural world began to lose its qualitativeaspect. Instead of form and matter, the four qualities, and the fourelements, equations and numbers now started to gain centerstage.The Newtonian Revolution transformed the nature of science.Newton had shown in the 1680s that the orbits of the planets arethe result of an attractive force between the sun and each planet, thusbringing into science a revolutionary concept: gravity. Conceived asa force that worked in a universal manner, whether the bodies onwhich it operated were heavenly or not, gravity was one of the main

Islam and Modern Science: The Colonial Era • 155concepts of Newtonian physics. His Principia, first published in Latinin 1687, firmly established the mechanical model in which bodieswere endowed with mass and subjected to external forces such asgravitational attraction.Ironically, the Islam and science discourse in the centuriesfollowing Newton was influenced not so much by the science ofNewton and those who came after him but by technologies developedon the basis of their science. The steam engine invented by JamesWatt (1736–1819), the hydraulic press invented in 1795 by JosephBramah (1748–1814), certain technologies used in the extraction ofcoal and the purification of metals, and military technologies wouldbe looked upon by Muslims as “wonders of European science.”This whole process of change, which had been taking place inEurope for over two centuries, was brought home for Muslims whenNapoleon arrived in Egypt in 1798. His army had superior weapons,better training, and was accompanied by scientists specializingin diverse branches of science and several new technologies.Muslims ascribed their military subjugation to a lack of science andtechnology, and their leaders told them that their lost glory wouldbe restored as soon as they caught up with Europe in science andtechnology. Religious scholars used their influence to support thiscall for the acquisition of science. They could easily produce evidencefrom Islam’s primary sources in support of their rallying cry, as boththe QurāĀn and the Sunnah are replete with exhortations to believersto acquire knowledge. The Arabic word for knowledge, ilm, was nowused for European science.The Ottomans were perhaps the first among Muslims to realizetheir poverty in technological knowledge. This came about throughmilitary defeats. The peace treaty signed on January 26, 1699,at Carlowitz was the end of a long chapter in their history and afateful beginning to a new century. The loss of a large portionof their empire was not the only factor in this defeat; the entireequation between them and Europe had changed, as became clearin 1718, when they were compelled to sign the treaty of Passarovitz,losing Belgrade. The Ottomans were now convinced of the needfor reform. This realization evolved into an entirely different era,the famous “Tulip Age,” during which the high culture of Ottoman

156 • The Making of Islamic Sciencesociety developed a craze for European civilization, resulting in theabandonment of traditional patterns of design, architecture, music,painting, poetry, and furniture in favor of European styles. Thisnew sensibility was an early sign of what was to follow. And althoughBelgrade was regained from the Austrians in 1739, this was a shortlivedvictory. The imperial center could no longer hold its parts; by1774 the Ottomans had lost control of the Black Sea to the Russians;in 1783, they annexed the large territory around the Sea of Azov. As aresult of these setbacks, Salim III undertook far-reaching military andpolitical reforms in 1792. The acquisition of science and technologywere the main features of this reform.In India, the fatal battles of Plassey (1757) and Buxar (1764)consolidated the British hold over Bengal and paved the way forfurther conquests in Bihar and Orissa. When the British won thebattle against Tipu Sultan, the visionary ruler of Mysore, in theclosing year of the eighteenth century, the fate of India was sealed,for Tipu’s army was the last real resistance against the colonization ofIndia. In 1813 the British government decided to increase its directcontrol over the East India Company (EIC) through a new charter,ending the monopoly of the EIC and thus paving the way for the fullcolonial structure. It was then that modern European science arrivedin India, and along with it came a new Islam and science discourse.This new discourse was contemporaneous with a violenttransformation of the Muslim world. Yet, on the eve of this violenttransformation, there seemed to be no awareness in the Muslim worldof what was just around the corner. In fact, the political leadershipof all of Dar al-Islam (the Abode of Islam) and its great populationseemed like an ocean sleeping before a storm: only a small segmentof the Muslim intelligentsia was aware of what was happening.Their awareness produced a series of reform–renewal movementsthroughout the traditional Muslim lands, which attempted toreconstruct Islamic thought and Muslim societies. These movementswere first and foremost religious in nature, but their aim was also torevive Islam’s formidable tradition of learning and strengthen society.These reform–renewal movements included the movement led bySidi al‐Mukhtar al‐Kunti (ca. 1750–1811) in the Sahara and the twoWest African movements of Uthman Dan Fodio and Shaykh Ahmad

Islam and Modern Science: The Colonial Era • 157of Massina. In the Indian subcontinent, the eighteenth centurywitnessed a major reform–renewal movement led by Shah Wali Allahal‐Dihlawi (1702–1762). This internal process of reform and renewalwas, however, cut short by the invasion and colonization of thesesocieties by the European powers.These movements were ineffectual as far as the general decay wasconcerned. Of course,in the fifty some generations of Muslim history, three or fourgenerations hardly suffice to indicate any long-term trend.Yet the depression of Islamic social and cultural life in thelate seventeenth and eighteenth centuries does stand outin retrospect. This is so chiefly in the light of what followed.With the nineteenth century came the utter collapse of thestrong Muslim posture in the world: that nothing was done inthe eighteenth century to forestall this smacks of inexplicableweakness or folly. But the sense that there was a depression alsoreflects the actualities of the Muslim lands in the eighteenthcentury itself. (Hodgson 1974, vol. 3, 134)What actually happened in the three powerful empires (theSafavi, the Indian Timuri, and the Ottoman) that emerged after thegreat realignment of the Muslim world in the post-Mongol era isakin to the slow growth of a cancer that remains undiagnosed untilit has spread throughout the body. When the rot was detected, it wasalready too late.What was decisive in Muslim lands at this time was especiallyone feature: the West’s tremendous expansion of commercialpower…by the latter half of the [eighteenth] century, decaywas becoming rout in the Ottoman, Safavi, and Indo-Timuridomains… by the end of the century, the accumulated strainsin the social structure of Islamdom called for radical newadjustments, which did supervene then with the forthrightestablishment of Western world hegemony. (Hodgson 1974, vol.3, 137)One of the most important changes to take place in the colonizedMuslim world at this time is related to the status of the Arabiclanguage. During the previous millennium, Arabic had remainedthe main language of intellectual discourse, encompassing religion

158 • The Making of Islamic Scienceas well as the sciences. Even in lands where it was not the commonvernacular, all major works were written in Arabic. This sharedlanguage of discourse had preserved an internal link with thetraditional knowledge of religion. It also served as a link for socialand economic transactions. An Indian Muslim could go to Cairo,Baghdad, or Makkah and freely communicate with scholars there ina language not foreign to either of them. This allowed the sharing oftraditional terminology, metaphors, and parables, as well as ancestralwisdom and teachings. The colonial rulers replaced Arabic with theirown languages in occupied lands. In the Ottoman empire, Arabicwas replaced by the Turks themselves as part of a modernizationdrive. Thus, within a short span of time, where Arabic was not theusual spoken language it became a foreign language. This not onlydestroyed the means of communication among Muslim scholars butin those countries where Arabic was not commonly spoken, it madethe QurāĀn and the vast corpus of traditional knowledge inaccessibleeven to the educated classes. This had an enormous impact on themaking of the new Islam and science discourse.New Rulers and New ScienceDuring the eighteenth and the nineteenth centuries Muslim rulersperceived science as a means of power. This was a direct result of theloss of their political power. The arrival of Napoleon in Egypt wasa turning point. After Napoleon’s army was driven out of Egypt andMuhammad Ali (1769–1849) took control, one of Ali’s most importantgoals was to modernize Egypt by acquiring modern science. He set upnew schools and training colleges where modern science was taughtby foreigners hired for inflated salaries. Between 1825 and 1836 hisgovernment founded military and naval institutions for trainingofficers and soldiers in the various military professions on modernlines, including some disciplines of modern science.These measures produced no science. The human resourcesMuhammad Ali amassed were simply not ready for the kind ofscience (and technology) he was attempting to introduce. It waslike attempting to have a body without a backbone. “The pupilsrecruited for schools—even when the problem of language was

Islam and Modern Science: The Colonial Era • 159somehow solved—had no idea how to learn a science based onits everyday procedures directly on individual, experimental,innovative inquiry..[the students] had learned to memorize ancientbooks, [but] memorization of an engineering textbook could notmake an engineer” (Hodgson 1974, vol. 3, 219). In the end, allthat Muhammad Ali could do was rupture old traditions withoutsucceeding in establishing a new system.During the 1830s he turned all his military might against theOttomans. He established links with the British and the French,leading to the great power game of the Middle East and ultimately tothe colonization of the entire region.Similar power struggles marked the disintegration of the Indianempire and resulted in the colonization of the Indian subcontinentby the British. The process began in 1498 with the arrival of Vascoda Gama (1469–1524) in India via a new sea route. This discoverytremendously changed the fortunes of the European economy and,later, its political power. Accelerated by the opening of new sea routes,commerce between Europe and India—then ruled by the Mughals—increased exponentially. This economic activity eventually led tothe arrival of merchants and missionaries in India. They began tointerfere in local politics, and within two centuries of Vasco da Gama’sarrival in India, the balance of power had shifted in their favor. Bythe beginning of the nineteenth century the vast subcontinent wasin the hands of Britain. In 1857 it became the brightest jewel in theBritish crown. It was in the backdrop of these developments that anew educational system, based on Western educational curricula,was implanted. At first it met fierce resistance but slowly gainedpopularity. The missionary schools were welcomed by the elite, forthey offered Western-style education that, in turn, was the ladderto economic and social mobility. During the course of that century,a fundamental change in the makeup of Muslim society had beenaccomplished.The Safavids were attacked by Afghans, who occupied Isfahanin 1722 but failed to establish their power; all they did was leavebehind a shattered and weakened empire. Eventually, Nadir Khan,a talented military general, reorganized the Safavid army andexpelled the Afghans. He was, however, not content with that feat;

160 • The Making of Islamic Sciencehe declared himself the ruler of Persia as Nadir Shah. Thereafter heset on a course of destroying the neighboring Muslim empires. Hefought with the Ottomans in 1730, attacked India in 1739, and sackedDelhi. To the north, he attacked the chief Uzbeg capitals alongthe Zarafshan and Oxus rivers. Nothing was rebuilt in the wake ofthis wave of destruction. Nadir Shah, like Muhammad Ali, found avacuous region and ascended to its kingship merely on the basis ofhis personal talent. When he was killed in 1747, Karim Khan Zand,a general from Shiraz, tried to restore the Safavid empire but failed.He ruled over a small region in his own name until 1779. After thisthere arose another tribal power, the Qajar, who consolidated theirhold over the entire region and founded an empire that lasted almostone hundred and fifty years, until a military coup d’état brought RezaKhan to power in 1921. In 1925 he extracted constitutional kingshipfrom the Assembly in his own name, thus establishing the Pahlavidynasty, which was overthrown in 1979 in a popular uprising.In Ottoman Turkey, the Grand Vizier Damad Ibrahim Pasha(from 1718 to 1730) introduced a number of measures aimed at themodernization of Turkey, including naval reforms and the use of theprinting press. Scientific geography became part of the curriculum ofmilitary schools. New training centers and schools were introducedon European models, often with the help of European experts andconverts. There were some visible results. A two-arc quadrant wasinvented by Mehmed Said, the son of the Mufti of Anatolia, for useby artillerymen; treatises on trigonometry, new works on medicine, aswell as translations of certain European scientific and philosophicalwritings started to appear. The new naval schools of mathematicsestablished in 1773 produced a new corps of engineers and artillery.Among all the eighteenth-century changes in Turkey, the introductionand acceptance of printing is perhaps the most important. Alreadyin the fifteenth century, certain Jewish refugees, fleeing Spain, hadset up printing presses in Constantinople in 1493 or 1494; this wasfollowed by similar presses in other cities. But Arabic and Turkishtexts could not be printed due to a ban that was not lifted until July5, 1727. The first book published from a fully Turkish press wasthe dictionary of Vankuli, published in February 1729 (Inalcik andQuataert 1994, vol. 2, 637–724).

Islam and Modern Science: The Colonial Era • 161The nineteenth century witnessed a series of reforms, all aimedat modernizing Turkey. New schools were opened. Europeanlanguages were taught; scientific texts were translated into Turkish;the first modern census and survey was carried out in 1831. In 1845,a commission of seven eminent men was made in charge of proposingeducational reforms. Its report, submitted in August 1846, calledfor the establishment of an Ottoman state university, a network ofprimary and secondary schools, and a permanent Council of PublicInstruction.The Ottoman leaders of the nineteenth century were obsessedwith the idea of reform, but no matter how many reforms they carriedout the economic, political, and social difficulties of the empireremained unsolved. This process of reform produced some criticalminds bold enough to criticize their own rulers and society and callfor basic change, but it did not reform the society.With the major defeats suffered by the Ottomans during WorldWar I and after the signing of the treaty of Sèvres on August 10,1920, the Sultans had lost much public support. This led the wayfor the emergence of Mustafa Kemal Paşa, later known as KemalAtatürk (1881–1938), who launched a war of liberation to saveTurkey from falling into the hands of European powers. On March3, 1924, he abolished the Caliphate, banished all members of theOttoman Sultanate from the Turkish territory, and Turkey becamea secular republic. This was followed by the abolition of the Islamicinstitutions of the country: the office of the Shaykh al-Islam; theMinistry of Religious Law, religious schools and colleges; Islamiccourts. These actions created a great deal of resentment and publicoutcry. Demonstrations followed. Spontaneous armed groupsemerged. Now the Republic established in the name of freedomresorted to military action. Kurds, a very large number of citizensof the eastern provinces, leading religious scholars, old nobility, andeven young Turks who had been part of the Kemalist revolution butwho now differed with Kemal’s policies were subjected to atrocities.For Mustafa Kemal and his associates, civilization meant Europeancivilization, as one of Kemal’s close associates, Abdullah Cevdet,wrote in 1911 (Lewis 1961, 267). For them, everything related toIslam meant backwardness. They banned traditional dress. The fez,

162 • The Making of Islamic Sciencethe Turkish hat which had remained a sign of nobility for centuries,was deemed “an emblem of ignorance, negligence, fanaticism, andhatred of progress and civilization” (Lewis 1961, 268). In anotherspeech, Mustafa Kemal declared: “I do not leave any scripture, anydogma, any frozen and ossified rule as my legacy in ideas. My legacyis science and reason.”This dissociation from Islam by the new rulers of Turkey wasnot shared by the masses, who continued to practice their religion.But the state had gained enormous powers and ruthlessly curbedany public display of religious loyalties. It expunged Islam from thecurriculum and imported a large amount of “science” from Europe.Islam was now perceived as the greatest enemy of science, which wasseen as the only means of progress and civilization. This officialperspective on the relationship between Islam and science was to bepropagated vigorously throughout Turkey.This is the social, political, and intellectual backdrop againstwhich the new Islam and science discourse is to be explored. Thisnew discourse took shape alongside the violent changes just describedand was directly influenced by them. The new Islam and sciencediscourse that emerged in the post-1850 era is so different from theold discourse that a modern Muslim scientist is unlikely to find anyresonance with men who were the most learned scholars and scientistsof the period from the eighth to the sixteenth centuries: Ibn Sina, al-Biruni, and Ibn al-Haytham are not household names in the Muslimworld; even an educated Muslim today knows very little about theirwork and the kind of understanding they had about nature. What ismost remarkable in this is a total break with the past, and the mostimportant vehicle of this transformation is education: since theircolonization, Muslims have learned to forget the intellectual traditionthat produced men like al-Khwarizmi, Ibn Sina, and Ibn al-Shatir.This tradition was violently plucked out of Muslim lands, leavingthem bereft of historical depth. Muslim societies have become victimof a cultural schizophrenia in which the past appears as a ghost to beexorcised.The new Islam and science discourse that emerged in the Muslimworld in the nineteenth century has two main strands: (i) a dominantand popular discourse in which Islam is seen as a justifier for the

Islam and Modern Science: The Colonial Era • 163acquisition of modern science and (ii) a distinct but minority positionthat attempts to maintain a close link with the past, and views therelationship between Islam and modern science in terms similar tothe discourse prior to the nineteenth century.These two aspects of the discourse have developed side byside. Both have been influenced by the manner in which modernscience arrived in the Muslim world during the eighteenth and thenineteenth centuries, especially when compared to its emergence inEurope during the sixteenth and the seventeenth centuries. The latterwas an organic development, emerging from and deeply entrenchedin the matrix of European civilization, with its roots going back toAntiquity. The arrival of modern science in Muslim lands, on theother hand, is akin to the transplantation of an imported plant intoan artificially created environment. The growth of modern science inEurope was a natural process linked to the social, economic, political,and intellectual currents of Europe; the growth, even survival, ofmodern science in the Muslim lands depended (and still depends)upon the maintenance of the artificial environment under which theimplant can survive. The former has naturally remained in perpetualcontact with all aspects of the civilization that gave birth to it; thelatter remains an odd entity in the Muslim world, which received theimplant while it was under colonial occupation.What is “odd” about this process is, however, not immediatelyapparent. In fact, contrary to this observation, most Muslims wouldeagerly claim that modern science is really nothing but a refinedversion of “our own science,” which Europe developed and returned.This view is perpetuated through hundreds of websites, conferencessponsored by governments and rulers, and through popularpublications. These popular perceptions deeply influence the newIslam and science discourse.That modern science is an odd entity in the Muslim landsrequires explanation. What is meant by its “oddity” has two aspects:(i) the manner of its arrival and (ii) a state of permanent paralysisin which this implant has lived ever since its arrival. Both the arrivaland survival of modern science is more by legislative acts, decrees,and proclamations of sultans, charlatan generals, self-appointedpresidents, and ministers of science and technology than through the

164 • The Making of Islamic Scienceemergence of able scientists, laboratories equipped with instruments,and libraries filled with research papers. It is strange, for example,that the Organization of Islamic Conference, with its headquarters inJeddah, has a permanent “Committee on Scientific and TechnologicalCooperation” with the expressed aim of promoting science andtechnology in the Muslim world, yet it has no scientific institutions,laboratories, or journals. Almost all Muslim states have ministries andministers of science and technology, who ceaselessly issue statementson the need to acquire modern science, but none of these fifty-sevenMuslim states produce any science worth its name and most ableMuslim scientists live outside these states.The following section explores various facets of the two mainstrands of the new Islam and science discourse. While the first strandis discussed under the simplified subheading of “Islam as a Justifierfor Science,” it is more complex than that, for it has given birth toa new kind of tafsir (commentary) literature—the tafsir al-ilmi, thescientific tafsir of the QurāĀn—which attempts to prove scientificfacts and theories from the verses of the QurāĀn. This first strandof the new discourse is mixed with many challenges of modernitythat Muslim societies face, a new agenda for education and varioussocial and political events in the Muslim world. Rather than beingan academic discourse, it has dimensions that often spill over intopolitics. In short, it is a highly complex mixture with the desire tojustify acquisition of science through religious rhetoric, political andsocial awareness of the need for reform, and various other aspects ofthe Muslim world as it came into direct contact with Europe throughcolonization.The Making of the New Islam and Science DiscourseProminent among those who shaped the new Islam and sciencediscourse in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries are theIndian scholar and reformer Sayyid Ahmad Khan (1817–1898); Jamalal-Din al-Afghani (1838/9–1897), whom we have already met; hiscontemporary Egyptian scholar Muhammad Abduh (ca. 1850–1905);his Syrian student and later colleague Rashid Rida (1865–1935);the Turkish writer Namik Kemal (1840–1935) and his countryman

Islam and Modern Science: The Colonial Era • 165Badiuzzeman Said Nursi (1877–1960), founder of an importantintellectual and religious movement in Turkey. The nineteenthcenturyIranian philosophers who wrote in the grand tradition ofIslamic philosophy—which had found its greatest synthesis in theperson of Mulla Sadra (1571–1640)—include Sayyid MuhammadHusayn Tabataba’i (1892–1981), the author of a major commentaryon the QurāĀn, Al-Mizan fi Tafsir al-QurāĀn, Murtaza Mutahari (1920–1979), and Âyâtollah Hasan-Zade Aamuli (1929—). Let us explore thenew discourse in some depth.Islam as a Justifier for ScienceIn the wake of the arrival of European armies in Muslim lands, themost dominant approach to science rests on the perception that Islamis a religion that supports the acquisition of knowledge: modernscience is knowledge; acquisition of knowledge is an obligation of allbelievers; Muslims must, therefore, acquire science. This knowledge,it is further argued, cannot contradict Islam, for science studies theWork of God and the QurāĀn is the Word of God, and there can be nocontradiction between the two. First used by Muslim reformers in thenineteenth century and thereafter constantly promoted, this call to“acquire science” has remained unsuccessful. Most of the championsof this rallying cry were (and are) neither scientists nor religiousscholars but they are reformers, who considered the enterprise ofmodern science a means to power and progress. They saw Muslims inneed of both, and hence they used Islam to justify their agenda.The reformers’ Islam and science discourse often uses materialfrom Christianity and science debates, including the formulationdrawing the link between the “Work of God” (nature) and the“Word of God” (scripture). What they truly desire, however, isfundamentally neither science nor the study of nature; they wantto bring the Muslim world out of its state of dependence and decay.Among the early leaders of this approach to Islam and science wasSayyid Ahmad Khan (1817–1898), who was active in politics andeducation in the Indian subcontinent under British rule. He was toleave a deep mark on the new Islam and science discourse through

166 • The Making of Islamic ScienceThe Indian reformist Sayyid Ahmad Khan (1817–1898)attempted to harmonize Islam and modern science byreinterpreting the QurāĀn.

168 • The Making of Islamic Science4.To have delivered in their meetings lectures on scientific orother useful subjects, illustrated, when possible, by scientificinstruments. (Malik 1980)In 1867, Ahmad Khan and the Society moved to Aligarh, wherehe procured a piece of land from the British government to establishan experimental farm. The Duke of Argyll, the Secretary of Statefor India, became the Patron of the Society and Lt. Governor ofthe N.W. Province its Vice-Patron. Ahmad Khan was the secretaryof the Society as well as member of the Directing Council and theExecutive Council.Khan was an ardent believer in the utility of modern science, adevout Muslim, an educator, and a man with a cause. His personalinfluence grew rapidly. His educational efforts were to change thecourse of Muslim education in the Indian subcontinent, and his ideaswere to have a major impact on the subsequent history of India. Hededicated his life to the uplifting of Muslims in India. He devotedall his energies and a portion of his personal income to the Societyhe established for the promotion of science. Eventually, he started toreceive small sums from like-minded Muslims and from non-Muslimphilanthropists, who saw in him a man of vision. On May 10, 1866,he established another organization: The Aligarh British IndianAssociation to Promote Scientific Education. Within two years theAssociation was in a position to assist persons traveling to Europefor educational and scientific purposes, but not many Muslims wereinterested in such trips at that time. Khan himself had never beento England, but he had been elected an honorary Fellow of theRoyal Asiatic Society of London in 1864. He now decided to go toEngland to see for himself the ways of the British in their homeland.Khan went with his two sons, Sayyid Hamid and Sayyid Mahmud.They left India on the first of April 1869; to pay for this trip, Khanhad to mortgage his ancestral house in Delhi and borrow 10,000rupees (Panipati 1993, 3–4). While in England, Khan was awardedthe title of the Companion of the Star of India by the Queen. Hisstay in England convinced him of the superiority of the British.“Without flattering the English,” he wrote in his travelogue, “I cantruly say that the natives of India, high and low, merchants andpetty shopkeepers, educated and illiterate, when contrasted with

Islam and Modern Science: The Colonial Era • 169the English in education, manners, and uprightness, are like a dirtyanimal is to an able and handsome man” (Khan 1961, 184).Khan was, first and foremost, an Indian Muslim living at a timewhen the entire Muslim world was in a state of deep slumber. Hewanted to wake them up. He wanted them to acquire modern scienceand be among the honorable nations of the world. He admired theEnglish for their science and learning, but when he read WilliamMuir’s biography of Prophet Muhammad, it “burned [his] heart… itsbigotry and injustice cut [his] heart to pieces” (Panipati 1993, 431).He decided to write a refutation in the form of his own biographyof the Prophet. He felt the need to do so not merely for academicand religious reasons but also because his own genealogy connectedhim to the Prophet. His book was finished in February 1870 andpublished by Trubner & Co., London, the same year. Khan returnedhome on October 2, 1870.During his stay in England he visited the Universities of Oxfordand Cambridge and a few private schools, including Eaton andHarrow; these would later serve as models for his own MuhammadanAnglo-Oriental College, established seven years after his return toIndia. (In 1920 the College became Aligarh Muslim University, nowone of the oldest universities of India.) In 1886, he started yet anotherinstitution, “The Muhammadan Educational Conference,” whichorganized various conferences in major cities for several years.Khan’s preoccupation with modern science and Islam was sointense that he wanted to lay the foundation of a new science ofKalam. This new science would either combat the bases of modernsciences or demonstrate that they conformed to the articles ofIslam. Personally, however, he was convinced that Islam and modernscience were perfectly aligned, and that all that was needed wasreinterpretation to show that the work of God (nature and its laws)was in conformity with the Word of God (the QurāĀn).To prove his views, Khan decided to write a new commentary onthe QurāĀn. This was a feverish effort that began in 1879. Khan knewhe was running out of time, and started to publish his commentaryas it was being written. When he died in 1898, this most importantwork of his life was still incomplete. His work was severely criticizedby religious scholars and other Muslim intellectuals, who pointed

170 • The Making of Islamic Scienceout his lack of training in Islamic sciences and his inability to useArabic sources; his zeal to show the agreement between the Wordand Work of God earned the pejorative title of Néchari (“naturalist”).The minimum qualifications for writing a commentary on theQurāĀn were a command over Arabic, a sound knowledge of thesayings of the Prophet, and a thorough grounding in the science ofinterpretation; Khan lacked all of these. In addition, he did not havean understanding of modern science. His unfinished commentaryattempted to rationalize all aspects of the QurāĀn that could not beproved by modern scientific methods. These included matters suchas the nature and impact of supplications, which he tried to explainas psychological phenomena. Khan however was not alone in makingsuch an effort, as we will see in the next section.By the time he died, Khan was regarded as the most influentialand respected leader of the Indian Muslim community. He hadbecome the intellectual leader of a new generation of Indian Muslimswho went to England for “higher education.” He was a loyal subjectof the British Raj and was considered an ally by the colonial rulers.He was nominated as a member of the Vice Regal Legislative Councilin 1878; ten years later, he was knighted as Knight Commander ofthe Star of India. In 1889 he was awarded an honorary degree fromthe University of Edinburgh. Khan’s impact on the making of a newIslam and science discourse in the Indian subcontinent can hardlybe overstressed. He was not only a thinker but also a practical manwho set up institutions that influenced, and continue to influence,the course of education, intellectual thought, and discourse on Islamand science. He was convinced that Muslims need to acquire modernscience. This argument gained considerable currency and is still usedby many thinkers and rulers throughout the Muslim world. His viewson the harmony between Islam and science were shared by manyreformers all over the Muslim world. His naturalistic explanations ofthe QurāĀn were, however, attacked by many religious scholars as wellas other thinkers. One such scholar, reformer, and revolutionary ofsorts was Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, who also played a major role in thedevelopment of the new Islam and science discourse in the nineteenthcentury. He arrived in India in 1879 just in time to write a majorrebuttal of Khan’s Nécheri views.

Islam and Modern Science: The Colonial Era • 171Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (1838/9–1897) influenced manysubsequent works on Islam and science

172 • The Making of Islamic ScienceThere is considerable uncertainty about al-Afghani’s place ofbirth and childhood years. He is said to have received his earlyeducation in a religious school near Kabul (Afghanistan), Qazwin(Iran), or Tehran (Iran). He went to India in 1855/6, shortly beforethe failed uprising against the British and experienced first-hand, inthe repercussions, the cruelty of British rule in India. This visit left adeep mark on the twenty-year-old man who would rise to become themost distinct intellectual voice of the colonized Muslims during thelast quarter of the nineteenth century. From India, al-Afghani wentto Makkah by land, stopping in various Muslim lands on his way. Heperformed Hajj and returned to Afghanistan by way of Iraq and Iran,where he became an advisor to the ruler of Afghanistan, Amir DostMuhammad Khan. He arrived in India in 1879 for a second visit, thistime to stay for three years. He spent most of his time in Hyderabad,a semi-independent princely state and the cultural center of Indiaat that time. This is where he wrote his Persian refutation of AhmadKhan’s Nécheri (naturalistic) ideas, The Truth of the Néchari Religionand an Explanation of the Nécharis (1881). Five years later, it was cotranslatedinto Arabic by one of al-Afghani’s Egyptian students andfellow reformer, Muhammad Abduh. The translation was publishedin Beirut with a shorter title, ar-Radd ala ad-Dahriyyin (Refutation of theMaterialists), in 1886. The original Persian became popular and wasreprinted in the year of its publication (1881) from Bombay. Therewas also an Urdu translation under its original Persian title, publishedin 1883 in Calcutta. These translations spread al-Afghani’s ideasthroughout the Muslim world, while English and French translationsof his writings carried Al-Afghani’s ideas to other parts of the world.In his response, al-Afghani considered nécheris and materialiststhe “deniers of divinity” who “believed that nothing exists exceptmatiére (matter).” He included Darwinism in his response and tracedits origins to Epicurus. “If one asked him,” he wrote about Darwin,why the fish of Lake Aral and the Caspian Sea, although theyshare the same food and drink and compete in the same arena,have developed different forms—what answer could he giveexcept to bite his tongue…only the imperfect resemblancebetween man and monkey has cast this unfortunate man intothe desert of fantasies? (Keddie 1968, 136)

Islam and Modern Science: The Colonial Era • 173Al-Afghani rejected the ideas of those materialists who attributedthe cause of all changes in the composition of the heavens and earthto “matter, force and intelligence.” He considered these ideas to be“corrupt.” He accused the materialists of undermining the veryfoundations of human society by destroying the “castle of happiness”based on religious beliefs. Al-Afghani enumerated “the three qualitiesthat have been produced in peoples and nations from the mostancient times because of religion” as being (i) the modesty of the soul,which prevents them from committing acts that would cause foulnessand disgrace; (ii) trustworthiness; and (iii) truthfulness and honesty(Keddie 1968, 146–47).These he considered the “foundations of stability of humanexistence,” which “the deniers of divinity, the nécheris, in whatever agethey showed themselves and among whatever people they appeared,”tried to destroy.They said that man is like other animals, and has no distinctionover the beasts…with this belief, they opened the gates ofbestiality…and facilitated for man the perpetration of shamefuldeeds and offensive acts, and removed the stigma from savageryand ferocity. Then they explained that there is no life asidefrom this life, and that man is like a plant that grows in springand dries up in the summer, returning to the soil…because ofthis false opinion, they gave currency to misfortunes of perfidy,treachery, deception, and dishonesty; they exhorted men tomean and vicious acts; and prevented men from discoveringtruths and traveling toward perfection. (Keddie 1968, 148)Concluding his refutation, al-Afghani praised religions, especially“the two firm pillars—belief in a Creator and faith in rewards andpunishments” (Keddie 1968, 168). “Among all religions,” he said,“we find no religion resting on such firm and sure foundations asthe religion of Islam.… The first pillar of Islam is Tawhid, [which]purifies and cleans off the rust of superstition, the turbidity offantasies, and the contamination of imagination.” Anticipatingan objection to his elucidation, he closed his treatise by saying: “Ifsomeone says: If Islam is as you say, then why are the Muslims in sucha sad condition? I will answer: When they were [truly] Muslims, theywere what they were and the world bears witness to their excellence.

Islam and Modern Science: The Colonial Era • 175Since humanity at its origin did not know the causes of theevents that passed under its eyes and the secrets of things, itwas perforce led to follow the advice of its teachers and theorders they gave. This obedience was imposed in the name ofthe Supreme Being to whom the educators attributed all events,without permitting men to discuss its utility or its disadvantages.This is no doubt for man one of the heaviest and mosthumiliating yokes, as I recognize; but one cannot deny that itis by this religious education, whether, it be Muslim, Christian,or pagan, that all nations have emerged from barbarism andmarched toward a more advanced civilization…If it is true thatMuslim religion is an obstacle to the development of sciences,can one affirm that this obstacle will not disappear someday?(Keddie 1968, 182–84)Al-Afghani’s apologetic approach betrays the weight of theprevious three centuries of Muslim disgrace. Yet he rests hisarguments on past glories he hopes return:I know all the difficulties that the Muslims will have tosurmount to achieve the same degree of civilization, access tothe truth with the help of philosophic and scientific methodsbeing forbidden them…but I know equally that this Muslimand Arab child whose portrait M. Renan traces in such vigorousterms and who, at a later age, became “a fanatic, full of foolishpride in possessing what he believes to be absolute truth,”belongs to a race that has marked its passage in the world,not only by fire and blood, but by brilliant sciences, includingphilosophy (with which, I must recognize, it was unable to livehappily for long). (Keddie 1968, 182–84)Ever since the first formulations of arguments such as Renan’s,many Muslim intellectuals have felt obliged to defend their religionagainst this argument—but only a few have attempted to recastthe entire discourse on a different foundation. They also did notchallenge the racialist elements in Renan and other writings of thetimes, for Renan was articulating a view generally held by manyEuropeans. Renan believed that in the final analysis, for reasonsinherent in Semitic languages, the Semites, unlike Indo-Europeans,did not and could not possess either philosophy or science. TheSemitic race, he said, is distinguished almost exclusively by its

176 • The Making of Islamic Sciencenegative features: it possesses neither mythology, nor epic poetry,nor science, nor philosophy, nor fiction, nor plastic arts, nor civil life.For Renan, the Aryans, whatever their origin, define the West andEurope at the same time. In such a context, Renan, who otherwisefought against miracles as a whole, nevertheless retained one: the“Greek Miracle.” As for Islamic science, “It is,” wrote Renan, “areflection of Greece, combined with Persian and Indian influences; inshort, Arabic Science is an Aryan reflection” (Rashed 1994, 337).Al-Afghani’s response is typical of a nineteenth-century Muslimwho felt humiliated by the lack of science and (what was perceivedas) “progress” in his own lands. In retrospect, his position appearsa natural outcome of the social, political, and intellectual climate ofthe nineteenth century. Al-Afghani had seen with his own eyes thepower of modern science during his travels in the Western worldand he was acutely conscious of the domination of the Westernpowers in world affairs. His response was to provide a motif forsubsequent developments in the emergence of the new Islam andscience discourse.Sayyid Ahmad Khan and al-Afghani were two very differentthinkers. They had different backgrounds, training, education, andreligious and intellectual perspectives, yet they both agreed thatMuslims need to acquire modern science. Both understood scienceto be the road to power: “There was, is, and will be no ruler in theworld but science,” al-Afghani had declared in a lecture in 1882. “Itis evident that all wealth and riches are the result of science” (Keddie1968, 102). Al-Afghani was unable to perceive in modern science anyspiritual or cultural matrix. He did not recognize any differencebetween modern science and that cultivated in Muslim lands priorto the Scientific Revolution. He criticized religious scholars whorecognized a profound difference between “Muslim science” and“European science.” He felt that the religious scholarshave not understood that science is that noble thing that hasno connection with any nation, and is not distinguished byanything but itself. Rather, everything that is known is knownby science, and every nation that becomes renowned becomesrenowned through science. Men must be related to science,not science to men. How strange it is that the Muslims study

Islam and Modern Science: The Colonial Era • 177those sciences that are ascribed to Aristotle with the greatestdelight, as if Aristotle were one of the pillars of the Muslims.However, if the discussion relates to Galileo, Newton, andKepler, they consider them infidels. The father and mother ofscience is proof, and proof is neither Aristotle nor Galileo. Thetruth is where there is proof, and those who forbid science andknowledge in the belief that they are safeguarding the Islamicreligion are really the enemies of that religion. The Islamicreligion is the closest of religions to science and knowledge, andthere is no incompatibility between science and knowledge andthe foundation of Islamic faith. (Keddie 1972, 104–5)It is interesting to note that in his defense, al-Afghani soughtrecourse with the man most accused of “destroying science” inIslam: Abu Hamid al-Ghazali. He quoted al-Ghazali in a lecture “OnTeaching and Learning” as having said that “Islam is not incompatiblewith geometric proofs, philosophical demonstrations, and the laws ofnature” and “anyone who claimed so was an ignorant friend of Islam.The harm of this ignorant friend to Islam is greater than the harm ofthe heretics and enemies of Islam” (Keddie 1972, 107–8).Al-Afghani’s contemporary Turkish nationalist leader andpoet Namik Kemal (1840–1888) also wrote a response to Renan.His defense was, however, quite weak. He defended the thesis that“nothing in Islamic doctrine forbade the study of the exact sciencesand mathematics,” but he used an anti-utilitarian and stronglymoralistic–religious” approach and failed to grasp Renan’s attack(Mardin 2000, 324). He wanted Renan to explicitly state that by“science” he meant mathematics and natural sciences and, if he wereto do so, then Kemal would agree that “Islamic culture had thwartedthe growth of science” (Mardin 2000, 325).Among those who played a major role in the making of thenew discourse on Islam and science in the generation following al-Afghani, Namik Kemal, and Ahmad Khan, the most importantTurkish scholar is Badiuzzeman Said Nursi (1877–1960). Unlike hiscountryman Namik Kemal, Said Nursi opposed the secular ideas ofMustafa Kemal. He was exiled to western Anatolia in 1925, along withthousands of other Muslims, when the new nationalist regime startedto use brute force to curb opposition. He spent twenty-five years inexile and imprisonment. During these long years, he changed into

178 • The Making of Islamic Scienceanother man—one to whom he would refer as “the new Nursi”. Mostof his works were composed in remote regions of Turkey, without anybooks or references. He was to make a very deep impression on thenext generation of Turks and the movement he started remains aliveand active. His writings have now been published as Risale-i Nur, afterremaining in clandestine circulation for decades.Unlike al-Afghani and Ahmad Khan, Said Nursi had considerableknowledge of modern science, especially of physics. He attempted toshow that there could be no dissonance between the QurāĀn and themodern physical sciences. He found modern science to be useful inconveying the message of the QurāĀn. Nursi’s impact on the makingof the new discourse was twofold: he set the stage for direct analogiesbetween QurāĀnic verses and inventions of modern science, and hisprofound spiritual insights led many of his countrymen and otherMuslims back to their religion against a strong state-sponsoredsecularization that had all but erased Islam from the Turkish publicspace. He used his rhetorical skills to awaken Turkish men andwomen from their slumber by showing that QurāĀnic verses alludeto inventions of modern science, such as railways and electricity,and that they should pursue the QurāĀnic verses to gain accessto the knowledge that can be helpful to them in this world (Nursi1998, 262). Though he attempts to interpret the QurāĀnic verses inthe style of tafsir, he did not write a full tafsir of the QurāĀn froma scientific point of view. Given the trends in the new science andIslam discourse, however, the development of a “scientific tafsir” wasthe most logical outcome.The Scientific TafsirA common feature of almost all scientific books written by Muslimscientists who lived before the seventeenth century is the customaryinvocation to God and salutation to the Prophet placed at thebeginning of their books. After that they state their purpose inwriting. What one does not find in these works is a mixture of scienceand tafsir (commentary on the verses of the QurāĀn), especially notin support of the scientific theories and facts being described. Noone attempted to show that their science was already present in the

Islam and Modern Science: The Colonial Era • 179QurāĀn. This was to change with the emergence of the new discourseon Islam and science during the post–seventeenth century era, whenbooks started to appear with verses from the QurāĀn purportingto confirm scientific theories. In the end, a new kind of QurāĀnicexegesis appeared in full bloom: al-tafsir al-ilmi, the scientific tafsir.We have already mentioned the incomplete tafsir of AhmadKhan published during 1879–1898. Another work of much greaterimpact was by an Egyptian physician, Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Iskandarani, and was published in 1880. His book has a long title:The Unveiling of the Luminous Secrets of the QurāĀn in which are DiscussedCelestial Bodies, the Earth, Animals, Plants, and Minerals. Threeyears after the publication of this work, al-Iskandrani publishedanother book in 1883 on the Divine Secrets in the World of Vegetationand Minerals and in the Characteristics of Animals. In both works, al-Iskandarani explained verses of the QurāĀn to prove the presence ofspecific scientific inventions in the QurāĀn. This trend of writing ascientific commentary on the QurāĀn became so popular that generalsurveys on the QurāĀnic exegeses had to invent a new categoryof tafsir literature to accommodate this genre. Thus, al-Dhahabi(1965) devoted a full chapter in his important survey, Tafsir waMufassirun (Exegesis and Exegetes) to the scientific exegesis. Likewise,J. M. S. Baljon (1961), Muhammad Iffat al-Sharqawi (1972), and J.J. G. Jansen (1974) note this kind of tafsir in their surveys. After thetrend was established by al-Iskandarani, several other works of thiskind appeared in the Arab world (al-Dhahabi 1985, vol. 2, 348). Asthe nineteenth century approached its close, scientific exegesis hadcarved out a place for itself in the tafsir tradition.Gaining a certain degree of sophistication, this kind of tafsirbecame a common feature of Muslim works on the QurāĀn in theearly part of the twentieth century. One of the most influential wasthat of al-Afghani’s student Muhammad Abduh, Tafsir al-Manar.This exegesis was compiled by his student Rashid Rida from a seriesof lectures on the QurāĀn given by Abduh in Cairo. Rida continued(from Q. 4:125) when Abduh died in 1905. Tafsir al-Manar was finallypublished in 12 volumes in 1927. This was one of the most influentialworks during the first half of the twentieth century, as can be judged

180 • The Making of Islamic Sciencefrom the number of editions of this work that appeared between 1927and 1950.The scientific exegesis of the QurāĀn reached a high point in1931, when a twenty-six-volume tafsir was published by TantawiJawhari (1870–1940). His tafsir, called al-Jawahir fi Tafsir al-QurāĀnal-Karim (Pearls from the Tafsir of the Noble QurāĀn), appeared withillustrations, drawings, photographs, and tables. In his introductionto the work, Tantawi says that he prayed to God to enable him tointerpret the QurāĀn in a manner that would include all sciencesattained by humans so that Muslims could understand the cosmicsciences. He firmly believed QurāĀnic chapters complemented whatwas being discovered by modern science.In the due course of time scientific exegesis made its way intothe main body of tafsir literature, as many religious scholars beganto comment on science in relation to the QurāĀnic verses. At times,a writer would divide his commentary into several parts, such asexplanation of words, linguistic exegesis, and scientific interpretation.A work of this kind is Farid Wajdi’s al-Mushaf al-Mufassar (The QurāĀnInterpreted), published in Cairo without a date on the printed edition.In his “remarks on verses,” Wajdi often inserts scientific explanationswith exclamations placed in parentheses: “you read in this verse anunambiguous prediction of things invented in the nineteenth andthe twentieth centuries”; or “modern science confirms this literally”(Wajdi n.d., 346, 423). Wajdi’s commentary is not exclusively devotedto scientific explanations of the QurāĀn, but many other worksare. Even the titles of these works are suggestive of the importancegranted to the nexus between science and the QurāĀn by the writers.Such works include Mujizat al-QurāĀn fi Wasf al-Kainat (The Miraclesof the QurāĀn in the Cosmos) by Hanafi Ahmad (1954), later reprinted(1960) as al-Tafsir al-Ilmi fi Âyât al-Kawniyya (The Scientific Exegesisof the Cosmic Verses); al-Islam wa tibb al-Haditha (Islam and ModernMedicine) by Ismail Abd al-Aziz; al-Nazariyya al-Ilmiyya fi’l-QurāĀn(Scientific Theories in the QurāĀn) by Matb al-Itimad (1942); Creation ofthe Heavens and the Earth in Six Days in Science and in the QurāĀn byHasan Atiyyah (1992); and many others.What is common in all such works is the zeal to show the existenceof modern science in the QurāĀn. This zeal is coupled with a desire to

Islam and Modern Science: The Colonial Era • 181prove that the QurāĀn is the Book of Allah, since it was impossiblefor anyone to know about this or that scientific fact in seventhcenturyArabia. They also use the well-known QurāĀnic claim of itsinimitability by restating it to mean that the QurāĀn is inimitablebecause it contains precise scientific information that no humancould have known in the seventh century and some of which remainsunknown to humanity even now.This has been one of the most exhaustive and methodologicalphenomena in the new Islam and science discourse; by the end ofthe twentieth century, all verses of the QurāĀn that could have beenused to show its scientific content had received attention by scores ofzealous writers. Lists of “scientific verses” of the QurāĀn have beencompiled, verses have been divided according to their relevance tovarious branches of modern science such as physics, oceanography,geology, cosmology (Qurashi and Bhutta 1987), and counted to be750 out of a total of 6616 verses of the QurāĀn (Tantawi, 1931). Thisactivity then started to give birth to secondary literature—books,articles, television productions, and audiovisual and web-basedmaterial. The second half of the twentieth century saw the expansionof this kind of literature, and this is discussed in the next chapter.Islam, Muslims, and DarwinismOn the afternoon of July 1, 1858, Charles Lyell (1797–1875) andJoseph Dalton Hooker (1817–1911), two friends of a man who hadlost faith in the traditional Christian understanding of the creationnarrative in Genesis, presented a paper at the meeting of theLinnean Society of London. The paper entitled “On the Tendencyof Species to Form Varieties; and on the Perpetuation of Varietiesand Species by Natural Means of Selection,” was written by theirfriend, Charles Darwin (1809–1882). No one could anticipate the farreachingconsequences of Darwin’s paper that afternoon—not evenDarwin himself—but that day has become a landmark of sorts forall subsequent discourse on creation. In popular accounts, Darwin’stheory would be perceived as stating that human beings evolved frommonkeys. This layman account was to become the most dominantstrand in the Muslim discourse on Darwinism. To be historically

184 • The Making of Islamic Scienceworks on Darwinism were mostly written by Christians who, in turn,became the immediate sources for works by Muslim writers in Syria,Lebanon, and Egypt.At the time of Darwin’s arrival in the Muslim world, Westernstyleeducation was only available in institutions established bymissionaries. Often various groups of missionaries fought forinfluence in the Muslim world. In mid–nineteenth-century Syria,for instance, the American Protestants and French Jesuits werefierce rivals; both established educational institutions. The SyrianProtestant College (SPC) and St. Joseph’s College (establishedby the Jesuits), both in Beirut, became the two most importantcenters of Western education in the region. These were not merelyeducational institutions; the missionaries understood their vocationas the spreading of the gospel and enlightenment, and scientificeducation was, thus, part of the larger package. The situation inIndia was similar. Many colleges established by missionaries duringthe nineteenth century became the sources of Western influenceon education and science. These institutions also became centers oftranslation out of practical need. In order to teach, these collegesneeded material unavailable in local languages. The staff had tocreate it; these teachers had proficiency in languages and they optedfor the easiest way out by translating existing French or English textsinto local languages. This gave birth to secondary scientific works inlanguages spoken in the Muslim world. Books on various branchesof science that appeared in Arabic, Hindi, or Urdu as a result ofmissionary effort were at best of modest standard, but they served thepurpose of spreading European scientific ideas in the Muslim world.This is how Darwinism first arrived in the Muslim world.Let us note that what eventually became known as Darwinism(along with its modified versions, such as neo-Darwinism andevolution) arrived in the Muslim world in installments. It was seenas a phenomenon, something novel, current, and interesting, butnevertheless not close to home. For all practical purposes, the “realevent” was never in full view of most nineteenth-century Muslimwriters on Darwinism. Many based their views and responses on priorphilosophical or faith commitments rather than on Darwin’s ideas.Often they recycled what was being said in Europe for or against

Islam and Modern Science: The Colonial Era • 185Darwin’s ideas. Their responses to Darwinism were, therefore, shapedby a perceived view of Darwin’s ideas, rather than his actual work.Since books published in the Muslim world at that time sometimesomitted the date of publication, subsequent accounts of the Muslimreception of Darwinism has remained difficult to assess, with differentsurveys reporting different chronologies of events. Sometimes theseaccounts do not even distinguish between Muslim and Christian Arabwriters and treat them as if they are all Muslim responses. All of thesefactors have greatly clouded the discourse.The earliest traceable mention of Darwin’s theory in Arabic goesback to a book by Bishara Zalzal published in 1879 from Alexandria,Egypt, with the title Tanwir al-Adhhan (The Enlightenment of Minds),some twenty years after the publication of The Origin of Species andeight years after the publication of The Descent of Man. This 368 pagework was dedicated in both prose and poetry to the Ottoman SultanAbd al-Hamid, featured a handsome portrait of Lord Cromer as “atypical example of the Anglo-Saxon people[,] and praised him in twolines of Arabic verse” (Mohammad 2000, 246–47). Both the title ofthe book and the portrait of Cromer are telling signs of Zalzal’s apriori commitments. Lord Cromer, let us recall, had arrived in Egyptto take charge of its finances shortly before the publication of thebook, just after Britain and France forced the deposition of KhediveIsmail and installed a more compliant successor. Cromer was in Egyptfor only six months, but his measures created unrest in the army,leading to the formation of a nationalist government in 1881. This,in turn, led to the occupation of Egypt by Britain and the return ofCromer to Egypt in 1883. He was to remain in Egypt until 1907 asHer and later His Majesty’s Agent and Consul-General, purportedlyas “adviser” to a nominally autonomous Egyptian government but inreality as the country’s de facto ruler.Darwin also arrived in the Arab world through scientific journals,which mushroomed between 1865 and 1929. The three mostimportant scientific journals were al-Muqtataf (1876–1952), al-Hilal(1892–1930), and al-Mashriq (1898–1930). The case of al-Muqtataf isrepresentative: while its editorsand those in it were predominantly Christians, they neverthelessmanaged to identify themselves with the Muslim community by

188 • The Making of Islamic ScienceVarious aspects of the new Islam and science discoursediscussed in this section existed side by side with a less vocal butmore deeply rooted discourse that sought to view modern sciencefrom the perspective of Islamic tradition as it had been shaped inthe preceding centuries. This aspect of the new Islam and sciencediscourse remained in the shadow of the other strand until the lastquarter of the twentieth century. Its presence during the eighteenthand the nineteenth centuries is, therefore, seldom acknowledged.What distinguishes this strand of discourse from the other attitudeis its restrained approach to modern science. A fuller articulation ofthis view had to wait until the middle of the twentieth century and isdiscussed in the next chapter.z

L7JIslam and Modern Science: Contemporary IssuesIn this final chapter of the book we are concerned withcontemporary issues in the relationship between Islam andmodern science. Islamic perspectives on modern science began toemerge in the closing years of the nineteenth century, if one takes thedebate started by Ernest Renan in Paris in 1883 as a starting point.Jamal al-Din al-Afghani’s response to Renan’s polemic has alreadybeen mentioned in Chapters 4 and 6. Since then the discourse hasbecome much more complex. For a better understanding of thecomplexities involved in the new discourse we can divide it intotwo broad categories. The first relates to the emergence of newIslamic perspectives on modern science in the post-1950 era; thesecond addresses issues that are totally new to the discourse. Thesenew issues have arisen as part of a greater process of change in theMuslim world and a brief overview of these processes, which haveushered the Muslim world into the twenty-first century, will be helpfulin understanding these aspects of the Islam and science discourse.The violent transformation of a colonized polity that hadundergone tremendous destruction of centuries-old traditionsduring the colonization period into some fifty-seven nation states,which emerged on the world map in rapid succession between thetwo world wars, has not been an easy process. This alone has left adeep mark on the contemporary Islam and science discourse. Morethan theoretical issues it is the direct impact of modern science andtechnology on the Muslim world that has determined the direction

190 • The Making of Islamic Scienceof the Islam and science discourse in the post–World War II era. Thesheer magnitude of changes to the physical landscape of regions thathad witnessed little change for centuries, the sudden appearance ofroads, railways, airports, telephones, oil refineries, and the Internetin deserts where until recently only camel riders traveled under thevast star-strewn skies could not but influence the way science andtechnology were perceived by men and women living in these lands.The arrival of new tools and techniques in a world unfamiliar withthe scientific principles that gave birth to them is a process that, asWerner Heisenberg (1901–1976) once remarked, has far-reachingconsequences for the culture that imports them—for tools andtechnologies change the way we live, which in turn changes ourrelationship with the tools and science behind them:One has to remember that every tool carries with it the spirit bywhich it has been created…In those parts of the world in whichmodern science has been developed, the primary interest hasbeen directed for a long time toward practical activity, industryand engineering combined with a rational analysis of the outerand inner conditions for such activity. Such people will findit rather easy to cope with the new ideas since they have hadtime for a slow and gradual adjustment to the modern scientificmethods of thinking. In other parts of the world these ideaswould be confronted with the religious and philosophicalfoundations of native culture. (Heisenberg 1958, 28)For the Muslim world, the post-1950 era has been like a rudeawakening from a medieval siesta. It is, however, the sudden usheringinto the twentieth century, filled with violence and traumas ofunimaginable proportions, that has brought the world’s one billionMuslims face to face with challenges the like of which they have neverfaced in their long history. Most of these new challenges are somehowrelated to science and technologies. The penetrating reach of modernscience and technology, their impact on the environment, their abilityto reshape and reconfigure lifestyles, and their control over modesof production—all of these have deeply influenced the Muslim worldduring the last quarter of the twentieth century. For a Western readerthe magnitude of this impact may be hard to understand, but to havean idea of this change we remember that from the environs of their

Islam and Modern Science: Contemporary Issues • 191holiest place on earth—the Ka‘bah—to the remotest desert in Africa,there is no place where life has not been altered for Muslims becauseof science and technology produced in the West. It is true that all ofhumanity has witnessed a fundamental change in the spectrum oflife, but this change has often produced corresponding adjustments insocieties where modern science and technologies are cultivated. Sucha process has not taken place in societies where modern science andtechnologies are imported. What Heisenberg realized in 1958 was, infact, merely the tip of the iceberg.The phenomenal impact of modern science and technologyon Islamic civilization has also produced a corresponding impacton the Islam and science discourse, resulting in the emergence oftwo different kinds of discourses in the post-1950 era. The first hasproduced new dimensions of that discourse, which first developedin the 1800–1950 era; the second is the appearance of an entirelynew kind of discourse on modern science. Before we begin toexplore these two facets, it is important to note that the temporaldemarcations being used here are not definitive but approximatetime periods that mark the appearance of a significant change inthe discourse. Likewise, it is important to have a general idea of theattempts that have been made to initiate a scientific tradition in theMuslim world, for these developments are related to the new Islamicdiscourse on science that has emerged in the post-1950 era.The liberation movements in the colonized Muslim world werepredominantly nationalistic in nature. Many of the men leading thesemovements had gone to England or France for higher educationand returned home to demand rights and freedoms of the kindthey had observed in Europe. The colonial powers allowed them toemerge as national leaders and in time transferred political powerto them—sometimes reluctantly, sometimes willingly, but in allcases with the satisfaction that nothing could reverse the course theyhad set during their occupation of the Muslim world. The political,educational, economic, and scientific institutions they had establishedwould continue to control new nation states, which were sometimescarved out of geographical areas where no independent state had everexisted in history (especially in the Middle East, where Syria, Iraq,and Jordan had never been completely independent states). The Arab

192 • The Making of Islamic Scienceworld, for example, which had existed as a mostly cohesive polity forcenturies, was divided into twenty-two nation-states, some of whichwere simply nonviable as far as their human and material resourceswere concerned. Borders were drawn through the sand, as it were,and states were carved out in a manner that divided tribes and evenfamilies. There are now fifty-seven Muslim states in the world; morethan half of these are contained in the same geographical area whereonly three existed at the dawn of the twentieth century.All new Muslim states that emerged from colonial bondageembarked upon rapid modernization plans. They sent their bestminds to the West to acquire science, they imported technologies,and attempted to look like their former colonial masters innearly all respects, from governance to social norms. Science andtechnologies became the most coveted commodities in these newstates. Almost all of these states established ministries of science andtechnology, prepared official policies for raising the level of scienceeducation, and diverted considerable sums from their budgets for theestablishment of new institutions for scientific research.But none of these measures produced science or technology inany of the fifty-seven nation-states—at least, not the kind of scienceand technology that altered the course of human history during thetwentieth century. What was produced, and what continues to beproduced in these nation-states, is a caricature of Western science.This was inevitable, for the rickety structure of scientific enterprisepropped up in these nation states is without a sustaining backbone.What these states have done in terms of their efforts for producingscience is like erecting a building without a foundation. They sentthousands of students to Europe and North America to obtaindoctorates in various branches of science with the hope that theycould jump-start the production of science upon their return. Theresults could have been expected: armed with their PhDs, thesestudents returned home to find there was no infrastructure to doscience. Libraries with the latest journals, laboratories with workinginstruments, industry in need of scientific and technological solutionsto its problems, large pharmaceutical and defense industries (whichfeed enormous sums of money into the enterprise of science in theWest)—none of these features of modern scientific research were

Islam and Modern Science: Contemporary Issues • 193present in the Muslim world, to which a substantial number ofWestern-trained men and women returned in the last quarter of thetwentieth century. These were, however, not necessarily scientistsbut merely men and women who had been awarded degrees byWestern universities and who could do little more than repeat whatthey had done during their stay abroad. Those who could do trulyoriginal scientific research realized they would have to return to theWest to do what their profession demanded, for conditions at homewere simply not suitable. And so many returned to the West, not inthe hundreds or thousands but in the hundreds of thousands. Thesemen and women now work in laboratories and universities as farnorth as the Arctic and as far south as the South Pole. They are partof the Western scientific enterprise—able scientists who have madesubstantial contributions to modern science.This is a general view of the context into which the twocontemporary strands of the Islam and science discourse haveemerged. Let us now explore these.New Dimensions of the Old DiscourseThe first strand of the contemporary Islam and science discourseis actually a continuation of what had appeared during the colonialera—a discourse in which Islam is used as a justifier for science.This strand of the Islam and science discourse experienced a boomin the 1980s, when various states pumped their new-found oil wealthinto sponsoring institutions for “research on the scientific verses ofthe QurāĀn.” For example, a “Commission for Scientific Miracles ofQurāĀn and Sunnah” was established in Saudi Arabia by the WorldMuslim League, with six goals and objectives:(i) To lay down governing rules and methods [for studying]scientific signs in the Holy QurāĀn and Sunnah; (ii) To train aleading group of scientists and scholars to consider the scientificphenomena and the cosmic facts in the light of the Holy QurāĀn andSunnah; (iii) To give an Islamic Character to the physical sciencesthrough introducing the conclusion of approved researches into thecurricula of the various stages of education; (iv) To explain, withoutconstraint, the accurate meanings of the QurāĀnic verses and the

194 • The Making of Islamic ScienceProphet’s Traditions relating to Cosmic Sciences, in the light ofmodern scientific finds, linguistic analysis and purpose of Shariah;(v) To provide Muslim missionaries and mass-media with Dawah; (vi)To publicize the accepted researches in simplified forms to suit thevarious academic levels and to translate those papers into languagesof the Muslim world and the other living languages. (As-Sawi 1992)The Commission has to date published about twenty booksdealing with the “scientific miracles” of the QurāĀn in various fieldssuch as embryology, botany, geology, astronomy, and cosmology. Itorganized five international conferences between 1987 and 2000 invarious countries, which hosted splendid ceremonies where Westernscientists were invited to receive attention and patronage from princesand other high officials of kingdoms and states. These scientistswere asked to comment on specific “scientific verses” of the QurāĀnon the basis of science. The result was the emergence of a scientifichermeneuticapproach that generated tremendously popularapologetic material. This material proposed to prove to the world thescientific correctness of the QurāĀn on the authority of great Westernscientists like so-and-so. In due course, these conferences havecovered all verses of the QurāĀn that have any relevance to variousbranches of science such as embryology, geology, and medicine. Theaudiovisual recordings of these conferences are available on scoresof websites and numerous books have been published in variouslanguages that use material from these conferences.A famous case is that of the Canadian embryologist Keith Moore,who was a regular keynote speaker at such conferences during the1980s. His textbook on embryology, The Developing Human, waspublished by the Commission with “Islamic Additions: CorrelationStudies with QurāĀn and Hadith” by Abdul Majeed A. Azzindani(Moore 1982). In the foreword to this edition, Moore wrote:I was astonished by the accuracy of the statements thatwere recorded in the 7th century AD, before the science ofembryology was established. Although I was aware of theglorious history of Muslim scientists in the 10th century ADand of some of their contributions to medicine, I knew nothingabout the religious facts and beliefs contained in the QurāĀnand Sunnah. It is important for Islamic and other students to

Islam and Modern Science: Contemporary Issues • 195understand the meaning of these QurāĀnic statements abouthuman development, based on current scientific knowledge.(Moore 1982, 10)During the Seventh Medical Conference held by the Commissionat Dammam, Saudi Arabia, in 1981, Moore said that “it has been agreat pleasure for me to help clarify statements in the QurāĀn abouthuman development. It is clear to me that these statements must havecome to Muhammad from God, because almost all of this knowledgewas not discovered until many centuries later. This proves to methat Muhammad must have been a messenger of God.” During thequestion session, when Moore was asked, “Does this mean that youbelieve that the QurāĀn is the word of God?” he replied, “I find nodifficulty in accepting this.”Similar state-sponsored programs were initiated in Pakistan,Jordan, and other Muslim countries. A precursor to this was thework of a French physician, Maurice Bucaille, who published hisenormously popular book La Bible, le Coran et la science : Les écrituressaintes examinées à la lumière des connaissances modernes (The Bible,the QurāĀn, and Science: The Holy Scriptures Examined in the Light ofModern Knowledge) in 1976. Bucaille’s book has been translated intoevery language spoken in the Muslim world and hundreds of websitesrefer to it. Bucaille, who was the family physician of the Saudi KingFaisal, attempted to show that the QurāĀn contains scientificallycorrect information about the creation of the heavens and earth,human reproduction, and certain other aspects of the natural worldwhereas the Bible does not. His book became the main source fordozens of other secondary works on Islam and science. Bucaille’s workis a forerunner to numerous other works that attempt to interpretthe QurāĀn on the basis of modern scientific knowledge. In all suchworks, the QurāĀnic vocabulary is placed within the framework ofmodern science and its verses are interpreted to show the existence of“scientifically correct” knowledge in the QurāĀn.The creation of the heavens and earth is a popular theme in thisstrand of Islam and science, where certain verses of the QurāĀn arechosen to demonstrate that the QurāĀn contains modern scientificdata. The two most often cited verses are Q. 21:30 and Q. 41:11. Theformer states, Do the disbelievers not see that the heavens and the earth

196 • The Making of Islamic Sciencewere joined together, then We clove them asunder and We created everyliving thing out of water. Will they then not believe? The latter reads, Godturned toward the heaven and it was smoke… In the first verse, the twokey Arabic words are ratq and fatq; the former is translated as “fusingor binding together” and the latter as the process of separation.These two key words are then used to support the Big Bang model.Other verses pertaining to creation mention “six days” during whichthe heavens and the earth and all that is between them were createdby God. The six days are shown to mean six indefinite periods oftime (Bucaille 1976, 149).There seems to be no problem with the interpretation of six daysas six periods, for the QurāĀnic usage supports this, but numerousproblems begin to surface when this QurāĀnic data is superimposedon specific data arising from modern science. Bucaille chose tointerpret “smoke” (dukhan), mentioned in verse 11 of chapter 41, as“the predominantly gaseous state of the material that composes[the universe, which] obviously corresponds to the concept of theprimary nebula put forward by modern science” (Bucaille 1976, 153).It is this one-to-one correspondence that begins to stretch QurāĀnichermeneutics. The entire enterprise remains conjectural, as no proofscan be found for such an interpretation. As the narrative proceeds,the desire to reveal “science” in the QurāĀn makes the task ofinterpretation even more difficult: “The existence of an intermediatecreation between ‘the heavens’ and ‘the earth’ expressed in theQurāĀn may be compared to the discovery of those bridges of materialpresent outside organized astronomic systems” (Bucaille 1976, 153).The foregone conclusion of this approach toward the relationshipbetween the QurāĀn and science is thatalthough not all the questions raised by the descriptions inthe QurāĀn have been completely confirmed by scientific data,there is in any case absolutely no opposition between the datain the QurāĀn on the Creation and modern knowledge on theformation of the universe. This fact is worth stressing for theQurāĀnic Revelation, whereas it is very obvious that the presentdaytext of the Old Testament provides data on the same eventsthat are unacceptable from a scientific point of view. (Bucaille1976, 153–54)

Islam and Modern Science: Contemporary Issues • 197The attention received by Bucaille’s book has produced reactionsas well. One of the more serious rebuttals came from an expectedquarter: a Christian response by William Campbell. The QurāĀnand the Bible in the Light of History and Science attempted to show theopposite of what Bucaille had set out to prove; it is the QurāĀn thathas it all wrong, while the Bible is sound (Campbell 1986).Bucaille was building on the trends in Islam and sciencediscourse already present in the nineteenth century. His contributionbecame more popular than the work of Egyptian physicians who hadembarked upon a similar project in the nineteenth century, perhapsbecause he was a European who fulfilled a psychological need ofMuslims emerging from two centuries of colonization. Whatevertheir utility, in the final analysis such trends remain polemical andthey provide little insight into the nature of the relationship betweenIslam and modern science.New Perspectives on Islam and Modern ScienceOne of the most important developments in the discourse on Islamand modern science owes its existence to the work of a few Muslimthinkers living in the West. Ironically, these new insights into Islam’srelationship with modern science have not been received in thetraditional Muslim lands with the same kind of enthusiasm with whichthe work of Maurice Bucaille and Keith Moore was received. This isa telling sign of the intellectual climate of the Muslim world, whichforced many leading thinkers to leave their homes and migrate to theWest. This westward movement of Muslim intellectuals and scientistsis part of the general exodus that has brought millions of Muslims toEurope and North America during the last fifty years.Muslim presence in Europe and North America is a uniquehistorical development with far-reaching consequences. ForEuropeans and North Americans, Islam and Muslims are no moretwo unknown and unknowable mysteries—Muslims have literallybecome next-door neighbors. This situation promises better relationsbetween various faith communities (a promise yet to be realized) andthe Muslim diaspora has produced its unique reflections on Islam,Muslim history, Islamic civilization, and science. In many cases,

198 • The Making of Islamic Sciencethis scholarship emerging from outside the Dar al-Islam is the bestavailable material in a given field; such is definitely the case for theIslam and science discourse. This section provides a brief survey ofcertain new aspects of the discourse.A broad classification of the current discourse on Islam andmodern science identifies three categories: ethical, epistemological,and ontological/metaphysical views of science.The ethical/puritanical view of science, which is the mostcommon attitude in the Islamic world, considers modernscience to be essentially neutral and objective, dealing withthe book of nature as it is, with no philosophical or ideologicalcomponents attached to it. Such problems as the environmentalcrisis, positivism, materialism, etc., all of which are related tomodern science in one way or another, can be solved by addingan ethical dimension to the practice and teaching of science.The second position, which I call the epistemological view,is concerned primarily with the epistemic status of modernphysical sciences, their truth claims, methods of achievingsound knowledge, and function for the society at large. Takingscience as a social construction, the epistemic school puts specialemphasis on the history and sociology of science. Finally, theontological/metaphysical view of science marks an interestingshift from the philosophy to the metaphysics of science. Itsmost important claim lies in its insistence on the analysis of themetaphysical and ontological foundations of modern physicalsciences. (Kalin 2002, 47)Another way of classifying recent developments in the Islam andscience discourse is to study it through the description and analysisof positions of major thinkers (Stenberg 1996). Whatever way onechooses to classify the new discourse, ultimately it is dealing with asmall body of literature that has emerged during the last half of thetwentieth century.These new aspects of the discourse are intimately connectedwith the entire range of issues emerging from Islam’s encounter withmodernity. Muslim thinkers have generally regarded this encounteras the most vital in the history of Islam and they have attempted tofind viable Islamic alternatives to Western economic, social, cultural,and educational systems in order to preserve Islamic values. This

Islam and Modern Science: Contemporary Issues • 199search for a modus vivendi includes a reassessment of modern scienceand technology from an Islamic perspective. The enterprise of sciencein the West has emerged from a certain historical background; itis highly linked to other institutions of Western civilization, andnotwithstanding its claims to universality it is the product of Westerncivilization. As such, it is deeply entrenched in a worldview differentfrom Islam. In fact, not only science but all modern knowledge hasbeen deemed to require an epistemological correction. This needcreated a movement that conceived a program of “Islamization ofknowledge.” Led by Ismail al-Faruqi (1921–1986), the movement wasbased on the premise that the root of decline of the Muslim world wasthe “educational system, bifurcated as it is into two subsystems, one‘modern’ and the other ‘Islamic’” (al-Faruqi 1982, viii). To redressthis “malaise,” al-Faruqi sought to unite the two educationalsystems and to Islamize knowledge. Al-Faruqi’s approach to theproblem of modern knowledge was based on the realizationthat the earlier reformers in the Muslim lands had remainedunsuccessful in their efforts because they failed to understand thedeep roots of modern knowledge. They assumed thatthe so-called ‘modern’ subjects are harmless and can only lendstrength to the Muslims. Little did they realize that the alienhumanities, social sciences, and indeed the natural sciencesas well were facets of an integral view of reality, of life and theworld, and of a history that is equally alien to that of Islam.Little did they know of the fine and yet necessary relation thatbinds the methodologies of these disciplines, their notions oftruth and knowledge, to the value system of an alien world.That is why their reforms bore no fruit. (al-Faruqi 1982, viii)The solution to this “Malaise of the Ummah,” as al-Faruqiconceived it, was perceived “in concrete terms, to Islamize thedisciplines, or better, to produce university level textbooks recastingsome twenty disciplines in accordance wit[h] the Islamic vision”(al-Faruqi 1982, 14). This idea led to the establishment of theInternational Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), which continues topursue al-Faruqi’s vision. Al-Faruqi, however, was not interested instudying the epistemological foundation of modern science, and hisplan dealt only with the social sciences.

Islam and Modern Science: Contemporary Issues • 201asserted with increasing emphasis that science is intricately linkedwith ideology in its emphasis, scale of priorities, and control anddirection of research. They observed that science promotes certainpatterns of growth and development, as well as a certain ideology.The key phrase in Sardar’s formulation is the neutrality of science, aconcept that has been seriously challenged by a host of scholars, bothMuslim and non-Muslim, in recent years.Sardar in particular and his associates in Ijmalis in generaldeveloped their discourse on the following assumption:The purpose of science is not to discover some greatobjective truth; indeed, reality, whatever it may be andhowever one perceives it, is too complex, too interwoven, toomultidimensional to be discovered as a single objective truth.The purpose of science, apart from advancing knowledgewithin ethical bounds, is to solve problems and relieve miseryand hardship and improve the physical, material, culturaland spiritual lot of mankind. The altruistic pursuit of pureknowledge for the sake of ‘truth’ is a con-trick. An associatedassumption is that modern science is distinctively Western. Allover the globe all significant science is Western in style andmethod, whatever the pigmentation or language of the scientist.(Sardar 1989, 6)Working with this main assumption, Sardar then developed asecond premise for his exploration:My second assumption follows from this: Western scienceis only a science of nature and not the science. It is a sciencemaking certain assumptions about reality, man, the mannaturerelationship, the universe, time, space and so on. It isan embodiment of Western ethos and has its foundation inWestern intellectual culture. Different constellations of axiomsand assumptions may lead the sciences of two different societiesto highly divergent interpretations of reality and the universe,interpretations which may either be spiritual or materialisticaccording to the predisposition of the society. (Sardar 1989, 6)Sardar and his associates situated science in the social andutilitarian realms, reducing it to no more than a tool for “solvingproblems and relieving misery.” However, higher science dealing with

Islam and Modern Science: Contemporary Issues • 203an attitude of care and preservation, and so on, without adding orsubtracting anything from the enterprise of modern science. WhatSardar and his associates failed to see was the foundations on whichthe modern enterprise of science emerged. Their discourse was moreconcerned with deconstructing myths, producing an awareness of theenormous differences between the status of Western scientists andthose working in the Muslim world, and vehemently rejecting certaintrends in the development of Islamic perspectives on science that werebecoming increasingly pronounced during the late 1970s and early1980s. Among these was the phenomenon of “Bucaillism” alreadymentioned in the previous section. Although Sardar did not realize,he criticized these trends as “dangerous” and traced their motif backto the psychological need of some Muslims to prove that the QurāĀnis “scientific and modern.” He took a contemporary pamphlet byMuhammad Jamaluddin El-Fandy, On Cosmic Verses in the Quran, tobe “one of the earliest” examples of such works, without realizingthat this apologetic literature was already the high point of Islam andscience discourse in the last two decades of the nineteenth century.Regardless of this historically inaccurate aspect, his criticism wasinstrumental in intensifying an internal critique of various positionswithin the Islam and science discourse.The Ijmalis position seemed important during its heyday but wassoon shown to lack solid roots for growth; its strongest advocates,who were mostly freelancers, did not make efforts to sustain theirdiscourse. All three champions of this position, Ziauddin Sardar,Pervez S. Manzoor, and Munawwar Anees, moved to other topicsduring the 1990s.The result of inter-Muslim debates on the nature of Islamic andnon-Islamic sciences was the maturity of the new discourse on Islamand science during the last quarter of the twentieth century. Thisprocess was helped by a number of international conferences andseminars held in various Muslim countries. Two of the most importantconferences of this nature were held in Pakistan in 1983 and 1995. Atsuch conferences, a whole range of perspectives on modern sciencecould be stated, debated, and thrashed about, with participantsreturning to their countries with fresh insights. Through this processthe new discourse sifted the important from the unimportant.

204 • The Making of Islamic ScienceThe Metaphysical PerspectiveHow does modern science relate to the concept of Tawhid, theheart of Islam which tells us that there is no deity except Allah,the Creator? What are the implications of the subtle metaphysicalassumptions of modern science? What are the consequences of theseassumptions in terms of our understanding of physical reality? Howdoes this understanding differ from the Islamic understanding of thephysical world? How are space, time, and matter understood in Islamand modern science? These and similar questions have informeda different kind of strand in the Islam and science discourse. Asopposed to sociological and philosophical studies on modernscience from an Islamic perspective, this strand of Islam and sciencediscourse has been built upon a metaphysics whose roots go back tothe centuries-old Islamic tradition of reflection on physical realityfrom the perspective of its ontological dependence on the Creator,its relative position in the overall scheme of creation, and its purposeand ultimate end. While exploring this strand of the contemporaryIslamic discourse on science we encounter different terminologythat deals with the physical cosmos in terms of its sacredness, itsinviolability, its ontological status, and its unfathomable links with thehigher realms of existence.Built on the insights of sages of previous centuries, this strandof Islamic discourse on modern science came into existencethrough the work of a handful of scholars who are often called“traditionalists” for their links with the living spiritual traditionof Islam. This view places the enterprise of modern science in ametaphysical framework and compares it with the premodernscientific tradition to highlight its main features. The traditionalsciences that studied the physical cosmos derived their principles fromrevelation, the traditionalists argue, whereas modern science derivesits principles from human reason. As a result of this foundationaldifference between modern science and the traditional sciences ofnature, modern science has embarked upon the study of the physicalcosmos in total disregard to its sacredness, and the results have beendevastating for the planet as well as for those who inhabit it. Treatingthe emergence of modern science as a historical process set in adefinite geographical region, this view of science links its emergence

Islam and Modern Science: Contemporary Issues • 205with other developments in Europe at the time of the ScientificRevolution. One important aspect of this discourse is its emphasis onsymbols and spiritual meanings of the physical entities that are thesubject of study in modern science.The main assumption in this discourse is the teleology ofcosmos—a self-evident reality displayed in and built into the verynature of the remarkable order of the cosmos (it is not imparted toit by the observer). This view holds that natural science and datagathered by scientific tools and observations should be examinedin the light of metaphysical knowledge derived from revelation.The exponents of this view claim that the sacred aspects of thisview are part of all revealed religions and hence part of the sophiaperennis (perennial wisdom). “By Philosophia Perennis—to whichshould be added the adjective universalis—is meant a knowledgewhich has always been and will always be and which is of the universalcharacter both in the sense of existing among peoples of differentclimes and epochs and of dealing with universal principles,” wroteSeyyed Hossein Nasr, an important representative of this school ofthought, in his 1993 work The Need For a Sacred Science:This knowledge which is available to the intellect, is, moreover,contained in the heart of all religions or traditions, and itsrealization and attainment is possible only through thosetraditions and by means of methods, rites, symbols, imagesand other means sanctified by the message from heaven orthe Divine which gives birth to each other. The epistemologyprovided by sophia perennis covers an incomparably greaterrange of possibilities since it opens the way for relating all actsof knowing to the intellect and, finally, to the Divine. (Nasr1993, 53–54)Built on the great repository of metaphysical writings of Islamicscholars, this strand of discourse on modern science attained itspresent form through the pioneering work of a small number ofscholars including René Guénon (d. 1951), Frithjof Schuon (d.1998), Titus Ibrahim Burckhardt (d. 1984), Martin Lings (d. 2005),Charles Le Gai Eaton (b. 1921), and Seyyed Hossein Nasr (b. 1933).At a different level and in his own way, Syed Muhammad Naquibal-Attas (b. 1931) has also contributed to this discourse. These

206 • The Making of Islamic Sciencepioneering studies are producing more fruits through the work ofa new generation of writers who have adopted the basic elements ofthis approach and who continue to expand the work of the previousgeneration.This approach is a marked departure from attempts to graftIslamic ethics and values onto modern science through artificialmeans. Here the discourse is built upon a metaphysical framework ofinquiry that constructs a concept of nature according to the primarysources of Islam. Concepts such as hierarchy, interconnectedness,isomorphism, and unity—which are built into the very structureand methodology of traditional sciences of nature—are used hereto identify the dissonance of modern science with Islam. Seenfrom this perspective, modern science appears as an anomaly, “notsimply because we have to pay a high price by destroying the naturalenvironment, but because modern science operates within a seriouslymisguided framework in which everything is reduced to pure quantityand by which modern man is made to think that all of his problems,from transportation to spiritual salvation, can ultimately be solved byfurther progress in science” (Kalin 2001, 446).The critics of this approach often construe this discourse asbeing anti-science, archaic, nostalgic, and impractical. This criticism,however, is the result of partial understanding: one does not findan anti-science attitude in the original work of these writers (i.e., if“anti-science” means a rejection of the need to study and explorethe natural world). On the contrary, these writers often reassert thetraditional view that the cosmos must be studied—because it is a signof the Creator. What they stress, however, is the framework for thisstudy, which they find unacceptable in modern science.The enterprise of modern science as it has developed sincethe seventeenth century is seen by the advocates of this discourseas a disastrous outcome of the loss of the sacred. Not onlymodern science but the whole outlook of modernity is markedby a loss of the sacred and the ascendancy of the profane. Thisinsight has been brought out most notably in the work of RenéGuénon and Frithjof Schuon. The enterprise of science cannotbe an autonomous undertaking; it is always part of a civilization.In traditional civilizations, sciences were always part of a

Islam and Modern Science: Contemporary Issues • 207hierarchy of knowledge that paid attention to the physical worldin due proportion, without either negating it or giving it undueimportance. With the advent of modern science this hierarchy hasbeen lost, plunging humanity into a state of multiple and deepcrises. This process started with the European Renaissance—atime that is understood by the traditionalists as the beginningof the modern dark ages—when “a word rose to honour,” a word“which summarized in advance the whole programme of moderncivilization: this word is ‘humanism’” (Guénon 1942, 25).Men were indeed concerned to reduce every principle of ahigher order, and, one might say symbolically, to turn awayfrom the heavens under the pretext of conquering the earth;the Greeks, whose example they claimed to follow, had nevergone so far in this direction, even at the time of their greatestintellectual decadence, and with them utilitarian considerationshad at least never claimed the first place, as they were verysoon to do with the moderns. Humanism was already the firstform of what has subsequently become contemporary laicism;and, owing to its desire to reduce everything to the measureof man as an end in himself, modern civilization has gonedownwards step by step until it has ended by sinking to thelevel of the lowest elements in man and aiming at little morethan satisfaction of the needs inherent in the material sideof his nature, an aim which is, in any case quite illusory, as itconstantly creates more artificial needs than it can satisfy.(Guénon 1942, 25–26)According to this view, modern science was one of the mostimportant products of this transformation of the Western world. Itarose by breaking links with the past. This can be demonstrated byone example.The term “physics” in its original and etymological sense meansprecisely the “science of nature” without any qualification;it is therefore the science that deals with the most generallaws of “becoming,” for “nature” and “becoming” are reallysynonymous, and it was thus that the Greeks, and notablyAristotle, understood this science. If there are more specializedsciences dealing with the same order of reality, they can onlybe mere “specifications” of physics for one or another more

208 • The Making of Islamic Sciencenarrowly defined province… the modern world has subjectedthe word “physics” to designate exclusively one particularscience…this process of specialization arising from theanalytical attitude of the mind has been pushed to such a pointthat those who have undergone its influence are incapable ofconceiving of a science dealing with nature in its entirety…(Guénon 1942, 63)Guénon goes on to describe how the different branches ofmodern science cannot be said to be the equivalent of the physics ofthe ancients.If one were to compare the ancient physics, not with whatthe moderns call by this name, but with the sum of all thenatural sciences as at present constituted—for this is its realequivalent—the first difference to be noticed would be thedivision that it has undergone into multiple “specialties” whichare, so to speak, foreign to one another. However, this is theonly the most outward side of the question, and it is not to besupposed that by joining together all these particular sciencesan equivalent of the ancient physics would be obtained… Thetraditional conception attaches all sciences to the principlesof which they are the particular applications, and it is thisattachment that the modern conception refuses to admit… Themodern conception claims to make the sciences independent,denying everything that goes beyond them, or at least declaringit “unknowable” and refusing to take it into account, whichcomes to the same thing in practice. This negation existed fora long time as a fact before there was any question of erecting itinto a systematic theory under names such as “positivism” and“agnosticism,” for it may truly be said to be the real startingpoint of all modern science. (Guénon 1942, 64–66)This view of modern science gained further clarity in the lucidprose of Frithjof Schuon. “Modern science, which is rationalist as toits subject and materialist as to its object,” he wrote, “can describe oursituation physically and approximately, but it can tell us nothing aboutour extra-spatial situation in the total and real Universe” (Schuon1965, 111). This “total and real Universe” is seen as beyond the reachof modern science, which is sometimes described as “profane science”to distinguish it from sacred science. “Profane science, in seeking to

Islam and Modern Science: Contemporary Issues • 209pierce to its depths the mystery of the things that contain—space,time, matter, energy—forgets the mystery of the things that arecontained: it tries to explain the quintessential properties of ourbodies and the intimate functioning of our souls, but it does not knowwhat intelligence and existence are; consequently, seeing what its“principles” are, it cannot be otherwise than ignorant of what man is”(Schuon 1965, 111).The most representative voice of the traditionalist discourse onmodern science is that of Seyyed Hossein Nasr. Beginning with AnIntroduction to Islamic Cosmological Doctrines (1964), Nasr’s scholarlywritings have explored various aspects of Islam’s relationship withscience over the last forty-two years. These works are part of acorpus of writings that addresses almost all aspects of Islam andits civilization—from the Islamic concept of Ultimate Reality tosacred art and architecture. His works on science have exploredthe essential features of traditional sciences of nature as well asissues concerning modern science. Nasr’s unique position in theIslam and science discourse stems from his thorough training andunderstanding of modern Western science and traditional Islamichikmah (Wisdom). Ironically, it was during his years at MIT andHarvard that he developed a deep yearning for what was not offeredat these prestigious institutions—a Wisdom which could only belearned through an oral tradition. Therefore, soon after his returnto his native Iran in 1958, he sought traditional masters so that hecould learn wisdom “at their feet” (Nasr 2001b, 41). By that time hehad already spent years studying Islam and Western philosophy andhad made contact with the great expositors of traditional doctrinessuch as Schuon and Burckhardt. But it was the period between 1958and 1979 that proved to be the most important time for his writingson science. His training in the history and philosophy of modernscience and the inner resources gathered from traditional wisdomare a unique combination, making him the chief expositor of a clearand insightful Islamic perspective on science. His critique of modernscience identifies five main traits of modern science, as Kalin hassummed up his position: (i) the secular view of the universe thatsees no traces of the Divine in the natural order; (ii) mechanizationof the world-picture upon the model of machines and clocks; (iii)

210 • The Making of Islamic Sciencerationalism and empiricism; (iv) the legacy of Cartesian dualism thatpresupposes a complete separation between res cogitans and res extensa,that is, between the knowing subject and the object to be known; and(v) exploitation of nature as a source of power and domination (Kalin2001, 453).Further explaining his position on the “religious view of thecosmos,” Nasr rejects theexternal understanding of religion prevalent today as a resultof which this phrase means only the acceptance of God havingcreated the world and the world finally returning to God. Thesetruths are of course basic for understanding “the religious viewof the cosmos,” but they do not include all that this phraseimplies. Rather, by “religion” in the term “religious view” hereis meant religion in its vastest sense as tradition which includesnot only a metaphysics dealing with the nature of the SupremeReality or Source, but also cosmological sciences which seeall that exists in the cosmos as manifestations of that Source,the cosmological sciences themselves being applications ofmetaphysical principles to the cosmic domain. The religiousview of the cosmos relates not only the beginning and endof things in the external sense to God, but also studies allphenomena as signs and symbols of higher levels of realityleading finally to the Supreme Reality and all causes as beingrelated ultimately to the Supreme Cause. (Nasr 2001c, 464)The traditionalists have produced critiques of modern sciencein general as well as of its specific theories, in particular the theoryof evolution. One of the severest such critiques is to be found inMartin Lings’s The Eleventh Hour (1988, 15–44). Several logical,scientific, spiritual, and historical arguments are presented by Lingsto challenge evolutionism. Lings likened the theory of evolution andthat of progress to “two cards that are placed leaning one against theother at the ‘foundation’ of a card house. If they did not support eachother, both would fall flat, and the whole edifice, that is, the outlookthat dominates the modern world, would collapse” (Lings 1988, 20).He argued thatEvery process of development known to modern science issubject to a waxing and waning analogous to the phases ofman’s life. Even civilizations, as history can testify, have their

Islam and Modern Science: Contemporary Issues • 211dawn, their noon, their late afternoon, and their twilight. If theevolutionist outlook were genuinely ‘scientist’, in the modernsense, it would be assumed that the evolution of the human racewas a phase of waxing that would necessarily be followed by thecomplementary waning phase of devolution; and the questionof whether or not man was already on the downward phasewould be a major feature of all evolutionist literature. The factthat the question is never put, and that if evolutionists could bemade to face up to it most of them would drop their theory asone drops a hot coal, does not say much for their objectivity.(Lings 1988, 24)Whitall N. Perry, another traditionalist, wrote a book on evolution,The Widening Breach: Evolutionism in the Mirror of Cosmology, andchallenges it from a cosmological standpoint. This refutation statesthat evolutionism suffers from a missing link and that there exists“no prerogative, cosmic principle or law by which this inanimate andsubjectless—hence limited—pristine stuff could from its inceptionmaintain over measureless time a perfect self-containment.” Theauthor asks:The point of all this is to ask simply, why should the pairsubject-object alone, on the plane of manifested existence notbe a ‘pair’, but be free from the ‘tyranny’ of interdependence orlinkage to which all the other listed and unlisted terms withoutexception are subjected? (Perry 1995, 3)Using a wide range of traditional sources, Perry attempts toplace the subject/object polarity in its proper frame of reference.He affirms the primordial truth that the Being of all beings is butone Being and that polarities appear only at the manifest plane ofreality. This subject/object relationship is essentially the linchpin forthe whole argument against evolutionism, for there can be no objectwithout a subject. Evolutionists may claim that one pole of a dualitycan exist in the total and unqualified nonexistence of its corollary orcounterpart, but such claims cannot be valid for the simple reasonthat in the whole of the manifest universe not a single example can befound to support this claim. On the other hand, the manifest universeis full of subject/object relationships that are expressed in numerousphenomena—the regularity with which the heavenly objects move,

212 • The Making of Islamic Sciencethe unerring functioning of all the laws of matter according to theirproperties, and the interplay of a wide range of dualities to producelogical results in the phenomenal world.In conclusion, let us mention a last example of the metaphysicaldiscourse on science. The writings of Syed Naquib al-Attas stand apartfrom the traditionalist school, but there are several common featuresas well. His writings on the relationship between Islam and sciencecan best be understood within the integrated system of thought hedeveloped on the basis of the application of traditional Islamicphilosophy (hikmah) to the contemporary situation. Examining sciencefrom the metaphysical perspective of Islam means a constructionthat takes into consideration the authority of revelation, soundtraditions of the Prophet, and intuitive faculties granted humanityby the Creator. One key aspect of al-Attas’s views on modern scienceis the epistemological considerations he brings to the discourse. Heobserves that Islamic metaphysics and modern science are based ontwo divergent foundations with regard to their respective positionsconcerning the sources and methods of knowledge. “It is implicit inal-Attas’s conception of science as ‘definition of reality’ that ‘science’is to be understood in the wide sense of the term as any objectivesystematic inquiry, including the intellectual, psychological, natural,social and historical disciplines” (Setia 2003, 172). In his opinion,modern science and philosophy suffer from a myopia that limits ourunderstanding of reality. “God is not a myth, an image, a symbol,that keeps changing with the times,” he wrote in his Islam and thePhilosophy of Science:He is Reality itself. Belief has cognitive content; and one of themain points of divergence between true religion and secularphilosophy and science is the way in which the sources andmethods of knowledge are understood. (al-Attas 1989, 3)Al-Attas’s critique of modern science considers the denial of thereality and existence of God—an implied component of modernscience—as the key source of all problems. Modern science conceivesthe existence of things in terms of their coming into being from otherthings, as a progression, a development or evolution. This perceptionof the world construes it as a self-subsistent system evolving accordingto its own laws.

Islam and Modern Science: Contemporary Issues • 213The denial of the reality and existence of God is alreadyimplied in this philosophy. Its methods are chiefly philosophicrationalism… rationalism, both the philosophic and the secularkind, and empiricism tends to deny authority and intuition aslegitimate sources and methods of knowledge. Not that theydeny the existence of authority and of intuition, but that theyreduce authority and intuition to reason and experience. (al-Attas 1989, 6)The denial or reduction of “the reality and existence of God”is recognized by a large number of Muslim scholars to be the mainproblem as far as Islam and modern science are concerned. It is notthat individual scientists practicing modern science are conceived asnot having faith in God; rather, the issue here is the foundationalstructure of modern science, which leaves out the Creator. All otherissues are seen as following this one initial divergence.Islam and the Brave New World of BiogeneticsPerhaps nothing makes the need for a thorough, comprehensive,and creative interaction between religions and modern science asapparent and urgent as certain recent developments in biogeneticsand reproductive technologies. After all, we can now have a childcome into this world from the womb of a mother where the wouldbebaby was implanted as an embryo created from the ova of adonor (paid to produce a number of ova following the use of hyperovulationmedication) and sperm obtained from a sperm bank. Themother of the baby in this actual case was, however, only providinggestational services to a couple who could not have children formedical reasons. Who would be considered the child’s real parents?What rights would the donor have over the child? What if one daythe donor of the sperm claimed his rights over the child? Whatwould this child inherit? From whom? What if the couple who hadpaid for the services of the surrogate mother and all other expensesdivorced after the child was born—who would have legal rights overthe child? What if both of them wanted to keep the child? Whatif neither wanted the child anymore? What if the sperm donorsuddenly changed his mind and decided that the use of his sperm

214 • The Making of Islamic Sciencewas not in full compliance with the conditions he had set at the timeof donation? What is a specific religion’s position on these issues?Let us consider a few more details of this case. As is usual, in vitrofertilizations (IVF) of sperm and ova produced not one but sevenembryos. Three of these were placed in the uterus of the woman whooffered gestational services for money; pregnancy resulted with asingle fetus. The remaining embryos were frozen for possible futureuse. Two years after the birth of the child, the couple sought andobtained divorce. The baby boy lived with the “mother,” who nowwanted to have a sibling for the baby boy from the frozen embryosthat were preserved in the fertility clinic. The “father,” however,objected to the use of these embryos. The agreement signed by thecouple at the time of IVF required the consent of both of them forany future use of the frozen embryos. The “mother” filed a lawsuiton the grounds that “her” baby boy was being deprived of his siblingsfrom the gestation of the frozen embryos.On what grounds can a court of law decide who has the right towhat? On what basis can a given religious tradition decide variousquestions arising from this situation? Religious texts and traditionsneed to be interpreted for obtaining answers for this case. Who caninterpret them if recognized religious scholars do not have adequatescientific understandings of the case?Such questions had never existed prior to the development ofassisted reproductive technologies (ART) now available. Similarquestions have been raised by advances in stem cell research, cloning,and biogenetics. Changes in the genetic structure of plants havebecome more or less a common feature of modern agriculture andanimal husbandry, but scientific research has rapidly moved on tothe application of genetic engineering to humans and this is raisingfundamental questions which before were not even conceivable.Transgenic genetic engineering—that is, the formation of onecreature including genetic material from two different species—is nomore merely an imaginative leap. These rapid advances have forcedall religious traditions to formulate answers to the multiple religiousand ethical questions springing forth from these developments inscience and technology. The enormity of the issues involved can bejudged from specific criminal cases now in courts. These range from

Islam and Modern Science: Contemporary Issues • 215theft of recently buried cadavers to the unethical use of placentasand umbilical cords to produce stem cells for huge profit.When a sperm and an ovum fuse together, a fertilized egg isproduced. This begins to divide, ultimately yielding the full humanbody. In the very early phases of division, the daughter cells are“totipotent”—each may be capable of starting off as if it were themother cell, to yield a complete individual. Later generations of cells,which cannot give a total body but can, under special treatment, bedirected to produce certain tissues or organs, are called “multipotent”or “stem cells.” Stem cells produced from adult blood or placenta andumbilical cord blood are helpful in the treatment of a limited numberof diseases, while stem cells recovered from the early embryo hold thepromise of curing a wider range of known diseases. This has led to apractice of destroying a living embryo for harvesting stem cells.The sequence and timing of research has dictated a certainorder to the dilemmas. For instance, IVF techniques have producedthousands of frozen embryos stored in various laboratories aroundthe world. Later it became known that frozen embryos have a highincidence of pathogenic mutations. With advances in stem cellresearch it became obvious that these embryos can be used to harveststem cells. Does this not amount to destroying a living embryo?These dilemmas are not merely ethical and religious in naturebut also legal, requiring governments to legislate laws. In the Westernworld, legislation on these issues has emerged from an institutionalstructure already in place. These procedures have allowed theparticipation of scientists, lawmakers, and all kinds of religiousand public opinions to play an active role in the process. Whetheror not a certain government allows and funds stem cell research hasbeen determined through these existing procedures, and decisionsremain open to future modifications. For example, Canada had nolaws or guidelines to govern stem cell research or federal fundinguntil March 2002, when the Canadian Institutes of Health Research(CIHR) announced guidelines for human pluripotent stem cellresearch. These were adopted by the major federal funding agencies;it was agreed that no research with human pluripotent stem cellswould be funded without the prior review and approval of theStem Cell Oversight Committee (SCOC) in conformity with CIHRguidelines. While the CIHR was developing these guidelines, the

216 • The Making of Islamic Sciencefederal government had its committees working on legislations onassisted human reproduction, including the use of human embryosfor research. After due process, Bill C-6 (Act Respecting AssistedHuman Reproduction and Related Research) became law in March2004. The SCOC and CIHR’s electronically accessible nationalregistry of human embryonic stem cell lines generated in Canadaare to play an important role in Canadian stem cell research. Theguidelines, effective June 28, 2006, and related issues are availableon the CIHR’s website (http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/cgi-bin/printimprimer.pl).In 2001, the President of the United States announced federalpolicy for the funding of stem cell research, which allowed federalfunding for research using the sixty existing stem cell lines thathave already been derived, but it did not sanction or encourage thedestruction of additional human embryos. The rationale was thatembryos from which the existing stem cell lines were created hadalready been destroyed and no longer have the possibility of furtherdevelopment as human beings. It was believed that federal fundingof these existing stem cell lines would allow scientists to explorethe potential of this research for the lives of millions of people whosuffer from life-destroying diseases, without destroying the life offurther potential human beings. The creation of a new PresidentialCouncil on Bioethics was also announced. The Council’s mandatewas “to study the human and moral ramifications of developmentsin biomedical and behavioral science and technology and to studysuch issues as embryo and stem cell research, assisted reproduction,cloning, genetic screening, gene therapy, euthanasia, psychoactivedrugs, and brain implants” (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/07/20060719-3.html).On July 19, 2006, the President of the United States vetoed H.R.810, the “Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005,” because hefelt that it had crossed a certain moral limit and that it would meanthat “American taxpayers for the first time in our history would becompelled to fund the deliberate destruction of human embryos.Crossing this line would be a grave mistake and would needlesslyencourage a conflict between science and ethics that can only dodamage to both and harm our nation as a whole” (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/ 2006/07/20060719-3.html).

Islam and Modern Science: Contemporary Issues • 217Likewise, on July 24, 2006, the European Union decided tocontinue funding under new rules adopted by the 25-nation bloc.These rules prevent human cloning and prohibit destroying embryos.These examples suffice in pointing out the importance of the roleof existing or newly created institutions, committees, and proceduresin the emergence of laws and guidelines. These processes are aregular feature of the Western political and social system and thereis a remarkable degree of integration of these with the institutionsof scientific research, though the two may not have similar positionson various issues. A remarkable feature of most countries in thecontemporary Muslim world is the absence of such integratedprocedures and mechanisms at the governmental level. This shouldnot be surprising, because these new fields of research have littlerelevance to the level of science and technology present in the Muslimworld, where the greatest issue is the provision of potable water.This is not to say that the entire Muslim world has ignoredthe need, as new institutions and consultative bodies have comeinto existence in some Muslim countries such as Egypt, Iran, andSaudi Arabia. In some cases, Muslim scholars have taken personalinitiatives. These initiatives have given birth to a small body ofliterature pertaining to “Islamic perspectives” on the entire range ofissues arising out of advanced scientific and technological research.This development is interesting because, on the one hand, theseissues are irrelevant to a large majority of Muslims, and on the otherhand a very small segment is participating in advanced biomedicalresearch and is aware of the need for clear Islamic perspectives onthese issues.In seminars and conferences on such issues, one often hearsstatements like the following: “It is high time for Muslims to come upwith..” These well-meaning statements display the same psychologicaldilemma that had informed the Islam and science discourse duringthe nineteenth and twentieth centuries. This “catching up syndrome”has created an insatiable hunger for Western science that continues inthe contemporary Islam and science discourse. This desire to produce“Islamic perspectives” on contemporary biomedical research is notconcerned with the historical process that has generated these issuesin the Western world; it only wishes to be present at the forefront ofdebates to prove that Islam does not lack a position in this respect,

218 • The Making of Islamic Scienceregardless of the relevance of the issues to the great mass of Muslims.A new culture of conferences and seminars has, therefore, come intoexistence in which Muslim scholars attempt to catch up with theWestern dilemmas of modern biomedical research. Regardless of thebasic aspects of the situation, an Islamic discourse on these issues hasbeen produced.Since there are very few qualified scholars who can expressopinions on matters requiring religio-legal rulings—rather thanmoral and ethical opinions—the process has required cooperationbetween religious scholars and scientists. It should be rememberedthat legal rulings in Islam can only be issued by a person duly trainedin Islamic Law (Shari‘ah). A jurisconsult (mufti) who issues a fatwa (anonbinding legal opinion) needs to understand the entire range ofissues in their complexity before passing a fatwa. This cooperationhas become necessary because the small number of Muslim scientistsworking in Western laboratories (which might be physically locatedin Muslim lands) in these areas of advance research are themselvesnot capable of passing these rulings, because they are a product ofan educational system that provides absolutely no training in Islamiclaw. Their personal opinions are, therefore, of little value as far as theShari‘ah is concerned. Thus, in order to circumvent this difficulty, theexisting discourse solicits the services of a mufti.Those who provide this service often do not understand theenterprise of modern science and, therefore, even if they are toldthe particular details of specific procedures involved in a certainkind of biomedical research, their approval or disapproval lacksa fuller understanding of the scientific aspects of the issue. Factorssuch as the direction of scientific research in a given polity, the widerange of economic, social, and political aspects of this research,the complexities arising out of the involvement of multinationaldrug companies and governmental funding agencies, and issues ofpatents and rights, all of which are not external to the legal rulingbeing asked of a mufti, seldom come into the purview of the religiousscholar or even of scientists. The religious educational institutionsthat have produced these scholars are still grounded in the tenthcentury, as it were, and are being asked to express their rulings onissues arising out of scientific research of the twenty-first century.

Islam and Modern Science: Contemporary Issues • 219While these issues are essentially irrelevant to the current realitiesof the Muslim world, the small body of literature dealing with“Islamic perspectives” on such issues is often termed pioneering workin the field. It attempts to derive its principles on the basis of wellknownprinciples of Islamic ijtihad, the process through which onederives ruling on matters for which direct precedent is not availablein the two primary sources of Islam, the QurāĀn and the Sunnah ofthe Prophet. These principles and their applications have existedfor centuries and were the logical place to go for Muslim scholarsinterested in searching out answers to such new questions. They hadalready used these principles in regard to certain other aspects ofmodern science. For example, when autopsies were first introduced tothe Muslim world, it became necessary to decide whether or not theywere halal (permissible) according to Islamic Law. The use of theseprinciples in numerous new situations arising out of scientific researchwas, in fact, a common practice during the premodern period. Then,however, Muslim jurists (fuqaha) were often part of the scientificcommunity, and even when they were not the science itself was inharmony with the basic principles of Islamic law, and hence there wasa symmetrical relationship between the astronomy, medicine, physics,mathematics, and geometry cultivated in the Islamic civilization andthe Shari‘ah, the Islamic Law. This harmony was broken in the post–seventeenth century period and Muslim jurists were forced to derivefresh insights into various issues that had started to emerge with thearrival of modern science and technologies in Muslim world.With regard to the human body, these issues arose in thecontext of autopsies and other post-mortem investigations, organtransplantations, and the like. Initially, Muslim scholars consideredpostmortem investigations illegal on the grounds that they violatedthe dignity of the dead. They could easily find examples from theQurāĀn and Sunnah to support their conclusion. But as certainbenefits of these investigations became evident to them, theirobjections disappeared, again on grounds for which they could easilyfind support in the two primary sources of Islam. Now no one objectsto autopsies on legal grounds as and when it is required for forensicinvestigation or to determine the cause of death.Over a period of time, a certain pattern seems to have emerged inthe responses of Muslim jurists to issues arising out of new scientific

220 • The Making of Islamic Scienceand technological developments: most jurists first oppose thepractice whereas a minority allows it; with time, the practice becomesprevalent and a de facto acceptance is then granted. The use of thecamera to take photographs of human beings is a classical example.As an specific example of the procedure adopted by Muslimscholars to issue legal rulings, let us consider an Egyptian fatwa onorgan transplantation issued in 1979 by Shaykh Jad al-Haqq, the muftiof Egypt at the time. The first point to understand in this regard isthat an issue is only open to juristic discretion (ijtihad) ab initio ifit does not have any precedent in law. The second point to note isthe application of the well-established principle of “consideration ofdominant public interest” (ri`aya masalih al-rajiha) or common good.The third point of importance in the approach of this fatwa is theapplication of the doctrine of that in the absence of any prohibitionspecified by Islamic Law, the doctrine of “original permissibility”(ibaha asliyya) applies to all situations, and organ transplantation isno exception. “The fatwa argues that organs severed from a bodyare not defiled and advances the view that a believer’s body cannotbe permanently defiled whether living or dead. Faced with a lifethreateningdanger it was even permissible to eat human flesh”(Moosa 2002, 336).Like many fatwas dealing with a new situation, the Egyptian fatwadiscussed analogous precedents to establish grounds for comparingthe organ transplantation with other situations. “The fatwa arguedthat by way of argumentum a fortiori there was an even greater reasonto approve the permissibility of organ transplantation” (Moosa 2002,337). Here is the relevant part of the fatwa:It is permissible to cut the abdomen of a person and remove anorgan or part of it, in order to transplant it to another livingbody, given the physician’s view based on dominant probabilitythat the recipient (donee) will benefit from the donated organ.[This follows] the jurists’ consideration of the preponderantpublic interest, that ‘necessity lifts prohibition’ and that a‘greater harm can be offset by a lesser harm’ and these areauthoritative [principles] derived from the noble QurāĀn and thesublime Sunna (tradition of the Prophet). (Moosa 2002, 337–38)Since this 1979 fatwa, the questions have become far more complexowing to advances in medical technology, as we saw in the previous

Islam and Modern Science: Contemporary Issues • 221example of a child born to a surrogate mother. These complexitiesdemand much more attention to detail, a greater understandingof the scientific procedures, and a far greater comprehension of thelegal, ethical, and moral issues involved. Is a person who has beenpronounced “brain-dead” but who is kept alive through a “life-supportsystem” still a living human being from the standpoint of IslamicLaw? Can an organ be harvested from his body for transplantation?Sometimes, it becomes impossible to apply a general principle to aspecific situation to derive straightforward answers. At other times,no clear-cut answer can be found merely on the basis of externalcircumstances because, depending on the intention of the person, thesame act may produce two opposite results.To deal with these complex situations, certain consultativebodies have been formed. These include the Academy of IslamicJurisprudence (AJC) established by the Organization of IslamicConference (OIC), the Islamic Organization for Medical Sciences, theResearch Council on Contemporary Issues established in Pakistan bycertain Muslim scholars, and various committees and bodies formedby certain Muslim governments under their Ministries of ReligiousAffairs. These organizations have engaged a number of prominentIslamic scholars and scientists in deliberations about various aspectsof new issues arising out of biomedical research. Their “cutting edge”efforts, however, remain peripheral to the larger concerns of thecontemporary Muslim world, where most of the issues arising out thisresearch are still like an alien sound coming from distant places.This irrelevance is notable and so is a peculiar pattern thatemerges from this irrelevance. This pattern produces “news”—ofteninternational news—which informs the world that such and suchMuslim country has now joined the ranks of nations where scientistsconduct research on some frontier of biogenetic or reproductivetechnologies, or stem cell research. In most cases, the small printof such news items is an implantation of a certain research beingconducted in the West, often with a complex agenda behind it. Atthe heart of such efforts are either zealous wealthy patrons who wishto see their country “join the ranks,” an international agency, or acorporation hoping to have access to a cheap and unhindered sourceof human organs, placentas, or blood. This pattern is especiallynoticeable in research that requires relatively smaller investment

222 • The Making of Islamic Sciencein instruments. A certain private center is created in the name ofscientific research, a local person trained in the West becomes thedirector of the center, and soon a full-blown controversy arises inthe country, more or less on the pattern of Western controversies.An example of this pattern can be found in the case of an in vitrofertilization center established in 2003 in Cairo. This news appearedin many Western magazines including The Christian Science Monitor(June 22, 2005). The center was set up to conduct stem cell researchusing stem cells from umbilical cord blood, with the hope of usingsurplus early embryos from consenting couples who no longer needthem for future in vitro fertilization. The news item then goesimmediately to the sensational aspect of the center: this research“could spark the same kind of ethical debate in Egypt that’s nowraging in the United States, and the prospect provides a windowinto the Muslim world’s divided views about the issue.” From here,it is merely a step to a host of political, social, and cultural issuesthat can be tagged to such news items. “Some Muslims in Egypt, adeeply conservative and religious country, are open to allowingembryonic stem-cell research,” The Christian Science Monitor tells itsreaders, “saying the embryo does not have a soul until later stages inits development. But others agree with Coptic Orthodox and Catholicclergy, who say it is immoral, even infanticide, to destroy embryos atany stage to harvest stem cells.”Standard formula for such news is to mention the perspective of“hardliners,” “moderates,” and “moderns,” attach a host of politicalstatements to the news, and spice it with some statements aboutIslamic law that present Islam as opposing advanced scientificresearch. This recipe is used in print and electronic media and itoften spills over into academic writings. In the end, what we have is nomore than a distorted view of reality in which some Islamic scholarsare shown to hold favorable views toward research on, say, embryonicstem cells on the basis of the Shari‘ah, while others oppose it, again onthe basis of the Shari‘ah. This muddled zone of the Islam and sciencediscourse is a product of its dislocation, its sheer lack of foundation.Often the writer will inform the readers that, unlike in Catholicism,there is no institution or individual who can speak for Islam. Thiswould supposedly render all opinions equally valid for consideration,thus leaving the reader in utter confusion.

Islam and Modern Science: Contemporary Issues • 223This caricature of the Islam and science discourse is a recentinvention. It has found popularity for it satisfies certain psychologicalneeds of Muslims as well as Western journalism. It makes Muslimsfeel at par with “advanced nations” in science; for various Westernjournalists and media, such news items make economic and politicalsense. What remains unsaid in all of this is the utter irrelevance of theissue to the vast majority of Muslims, the absence of any real scientificinfrastructure in the Muslim world, and the desperate attemptsof some Muslim countries to “catch up” with the West in science bysome magic stem cell that would remove structural inadequacies anddeficiencies of human resources generated over three centuries.Today, Egypt, Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Malaysiaconduct stem cell research. Iranian scientists had developed humanembryonic stem cell lines as early as 2003. Fatwas exist that considerboth the therapeutic cloning of embryos as well as embryonic stemcell research lawful. But in countries where the monthly income ofmost people is in the range of 10 to 50 US dollars, the danger ofselling organs, embryos, and other “spare parts” is high, especiallybecause legal safeguards are practically absent.Notwithstanding these broader issues, a number of works havecome into existence that explore Islam’s position on various branchesof modern biomedical sciences. Numerous conferences and seminarson these issues have been held during the last decade. They havehelped to sharpen certain questions and answers. A representativeexample of Muslim opinions on these issues can be found in theproceedings of a series of conferences organized by the IslamicOrganization for Medical Sciences, Kuwait (http://www.islamset.com/ioms/main.html).In ConclusionIslamic perspectives on modern science are intertwined with a host ofother political, social, and economic issues. We have examined someof these contributing factors that have shaped the contemporaryIslam and science discourse. Two important factors stand out fromthe rest: Islam’s encounter with modernity and a deep-seated, almostinsatiable, hunger for modern science in the Muslim psyche. In thefinal analysis, modern science is a Western enterprise, with deep

224 • The Making of Islamic Scienceroots in the Western civilization. Notwithstanding the claims of theuniversality of modern science, this enterprise cannot be dissociatedfrom the broader cultural matrix from which it emerged. Seen inthis perspective, Muslim scholars have an enormous unfinishedagenda at hand: to address what is to be done with a science (andthe technologies produced by its application) that has obliterated allother means of investigating nature and that has become the mostimportant enterprise in human history in terms of its effect on theway we now live.In the post-1950 era a new awareness among a small minorityof Muslim scholars has produced penetrating critiques of modernscience as well as Muslim attitudes toward it, but this strand ofdiscourse remains peripheral to the official attitudes of Muslim statesas well as to the general Muslim response to modern science, both ofwhich see modern science from the point of view of its utility, withan almost total disregard to the wider spiritual, cultural, and socialimplications of importing modern science and technology. Thefailure of Muslim states to jumpstart a scientific research in theirown countries and the enormous social and cultural dislocationsmodern technologies have produced in many Muslim countries havenot led to any reconsideration of attitudes toward Western scienceand technologies. For those Muslim states that can afford to pay forthe most advanced technology that appears on the horizon, there isnever a question of considering its impact on society. This headlongplunge into the ethos of the twenty-first century has contributed toa cultural schizophrenia in these countries, where a large majorityof the population remains alien to modernity in its attitudes whilea small minority pushes these societies into a fast-track process ofmodernization through the importation of science and technology.It must be clear by now that it is not Islam’s attitude towardscience that is under consideration in these cases; it is mostly thepsychological complexes of Muslims that have generated this soundand fury in the discourse. As far as Islam is concerned, modernscience and technologies based on it cannot be seen as neutral.Brought into the matrix of Islamic metaphysical and moral andethical principles, modern science and technologies do not remainvalue-free. As a system of thought as well as one of the most important

Islam and Modern Science: Contemporary Issues • 225factors in shaping the way we live, modern science and technologieshave to be seen in terms of their impact on society. This impact, letus note, is not merely in terms of certain ethical issues arising outbiogenetics, but are of a much broader nature. A small gadget like thecell phone which fits into one’s pocket can be as disruptive to a way oflife as a complicated procedure that transplants a fetus into the wombof a surrogate mother.A critique of modern science is often considered an “anti-science”attitude, a sign of conservatism, even fundamentalism. Seen in thecontext of the violent events that have marked the beginning of thetwenty-first century, Islam and science discourse is likely to becomeeven more complicated. Yet, almost two centuries of the clamor ofreformers asking Muslims to jumpstart the production of science intheir societies has clearly shown that this is not possible, no matterhow much science and technology is imported.A major intellectual revolution in the Muslim world canrecapture Muslim imagination and recover the lost tradition ofscholarship rooted in Islam’s own primary sources. This would leadto the emergence of a new movement helping Muslims to appropriatemodern science and technologies like the movement that digested anenormously large amount of scientific and philosophical thought thatentered the Islamic tradition during the three centuries of the earliertranslation movement. Only such a recasting of modern scientificknowledge has the hope of germinating the seeds of a scientificthinking in the Muslim mind that is not laden with scientism. Onlysuch a revolutionary change in thinking can liberate the Islamand science discourse from its colonized bondage and producegenuine Islamic reflections on the enterprise of modern science—anenterprise that looms large in all spheres of contemporary life andsociety.z

AfterwordIs Islamic Science Possible?Enough has been said by the proponents of Islamic scienceand by those for whom even the term “Islamic science” is anoxymoron. In fact, too much has been said by both sides and thediscourse has often spilled over to unrelated territories. Certainproponents of Islamic science find numerous recent scientific theoriesand even technological inventions in the Noble QurāĀn; some oftheir opponents reduce the eight hundred years of Islamic scientifictradition to a depot where Greek science was brought on horse-drivencarriages and kept safe until it was recovered by its rightful heir—Europe. Some proponents of Islamic science see Darwin, Copernicus,Kepler, Newton, Harvey, and Einstein prefigured in al-JĀĄiĉ, al-BąrĈną, ibn SąnĀ, Ibn al-Haytham, al-ďĈsą, and Ibn Nafąs, while theiropponents sarcastically ask science Muslims have accomplished overall these centuries.These are, admittedly, the extreme ends of the discourse, yet oneof the most significant realities of the contemporary world is the factthat there is no such thing as “Islamic science” anywhere. So, even ifthere once existed a scientific tradition which can rightfully be calledIslamic, and even if it existed for as long as it did, what remains tobe proven is its relevance and applicability in the contemporaryworld; without such a demonstration all arguments for and againstIslamic science are merely academic, dealing with a relic of the past,and while such debates are important for the history of science, their

228 • The Making of Islamic Sciencescope and relevance is limited. What is essential for this discourse tomove forward is the actual emergence of a scientific tradition basedon the foundational principles of the study of nature anchored in theNoble QurāĀn and the Sunnah.These principles have been eloquently expressed by a smallnumber of Muslim scholars over the last half century. Briefly stated,Islamic science is a science that takes the natural world as a sign (Āya)of the One who created it in the first place and Who is continuously,singularly, and uniquely its Sustainer. Furthermore, it is a sciencethat serves as a tool to utilize the bounties of nature for the benefitof humanity in a manner that is indicative of a deep awareness ofthe veritable relationship of humans to these bounties granted bythe Creator Who placed human beings as stewards and khulafĀā of allthat He created. A third significant aspect of science practiced fromwithin the traditional Islamic view of the natural world is the organicand dynamic relationship between scientific investigation and the realand true needs of humanity. It is possible to invest disproportionateresources on one particular aspect of science and its applications—such as high-tech weapons, space or deep sea explorations intendedto meet certain needs of the defense industry, or medical techniqueswhich would only be practically available to rich and influentialpeople—such an orientation for scientific research does not reflectIslamic principles and values. These and other aspects of a newtradition of science and technology, firmly anchored in the Islamicweltanschauung, delineate and define differences both in theoryand practice that set it apart from a science and technology not sogrounded and rooted.Given the unambiguous position of Muslim scholars on the natureof Islamic science, one would expect that by now a readily identifiablerevitalized Islamic scientific tradition and, consequently, a communityof Muslim scientists would have come into existence. Yet there isneither such a revitalized tradition nor such a scientific community.There are, indeed, thousands of distinguished scientists who areMuslim, but one cannot find Muslim scientists dedicated to theexploration of the natural world from within the Islamic worldview.Does this mean that all formulations of Islamic science are merelytheoretical propositions with no real potentiality? In other words,

Afterword: Is Islamic Science Possible? • 229are the claims of the opponents of Islamic science really true? Stillanother way of asking the same question is: Is Islamic science reallypossible in the contemporary world?An affirmative answer to this question is not another book orarticle on Islamic science, but an actually discernible and livingtradition of science that clearly stands out against the ubiquitouslypresent science and technology based on the principles firstoutlined by Western philosophers and scientists during theEuropean Renaissance and since then put into practice by successivegenerations. This science and its applications have not only givenhumanity certain useful discoveries, techniques, and products, buthave simultaneously reshaped life in its own image. It has done so byremoving God from the center of the cosmos and by restructuringthe entire rhythm of life against nature, against all that is profoundand worthy of constant reflection. That it has done so needs nomore proof than the loud and clear lament of the Earth. Oneneeds only to look at the readily available data produced with thehelp of instruments and tools developed by this same science. Thisdata is real, verifiable, and unambiguous in stating the sad tale ofdevastation suffered by mountains and oceans, rainforests, rivers,ecology, and the ozone layer.That it is modern science and technology which have empoweredhuman beings to cause a large-scale, unprecedented devastation tothe natural world is uncontestable, but it can be—and has been—argued that it is the wrong use of science and technology and notmerely modern science and technology per se, which has caused thisdestruction. This argument is, however, not valid, because a sciencesevered from the Creator could have produced no other result. Sucha science and its products cannot but be handmaiden to a greeddriveneconomy and devastating tools in the hands of those whopossess them.Modern science is not a stand alone enterprise; it is a subset ofa larger system based on a particular view of nature and humanity.Those who have developed it have done so in a manner most befittingtheir concept of nature and humanity. It has been pressed into theservice of the system from which it emerged. One needs only to feelin one’s heart the agony and suffering of millions of human beings

230 • The Making of Islamic Scienceat the moment when their lives were being extinguished by deadlybombs dropped from the skies to understand the true nature of themodern enterprise of science and technology. It is simply not possibleto invent a cruise missile and keep it in the closet. Those who makeweapons of mass destruction and place them in the hands of menand women who command their use are equally responsible for thedeaths of young babes and fragile old men and women who havebeen annihilated in the very act of living their everyday lives in theirhomes and places of work. Nations empowered by modern scienceand technology could not have behaved in any other manner thanthe particular way they have, for to possess power of this kind meansits usage is most probable. And those who have discovered thesescientific principles and developed these deadly technologies cannotescape the responsibility for what they have done.If the large-scale devastation witnessed by humanity and naturalhabitats during the twentieth century has taught us anything, it isimperative that a new awareness emerge in the scientific community.In order to reclaim a saner vision of life and death, the scientificcommunity cannot continue to compartmentalize faith and science;science and faith must form a single and unified spiritual, ethical,and moral commitment, the latter informing the former. Whileall believing scientists have a responsibility to reexamine what theyhave made possible by providing to certain people tools and meansto wrought unprecedented destruction of human and natural life,Muslim scientists have an added role in this reexamination, for theyare supposed to be the witnesses, the carriers, and the true examplesof the message of the Noble QurāĀn.At the practical level, the most significant impediment to theemergence of a global community of Muslim scientists—and henceIslamic science—is the severance of Muslim scientists from their ownreligious and intellectual traditions. Since they invariably emergefrom secular educational institutions, their education and trainingalienate them from their own tradition. This is not to say that Muslimscientists are not pious Muslims, but to point out that they are notable to holistically integrate their faith and profession; their scienceremains firmly rooted in a vision other than that of Islam. Madrasa-

Afterword: Is Islamic Science Possible? • 231trained ĂulamĀā, on the other hand, do not receive enough adequatescientific training to practice science as a profession.An obvious and practical solution to overcome this impedimentis to dedicate a certain number of madĀris in the Muslim world asspecial institutions where traditional sciences are accompaniedby a thorough study of various disciplines of science. This wouldbe perfectly in line with past practice, when certain madĀris servedthe dual purpose of being the centers of religious as well as naturalsciences. The still-standing fabulous madrasa of Ulugh Beg inSamarqand is one such example. We have an inside account ofthe high level of religious scholarship accompanied by an equallyhigh level of scientific investigations taking place at this madrasain the form of a letter written by GhiyĀth al-Dąn al-KĀshą, a mostaccomplished mathematician and astronomer of the ninth/fifteenthcentury. Al-KĀshą wrote a letter to his father shortly after his arrivalin Samarqand around 823/1420. The letter speaks of the “Sultan[that is, Ulugh Beg] being extremely well-educated in the [sciencesof] the QurāĀn, in Arabic grammar, in logic, and in mathematicalsciences”. It mentions the presence of sixty or seventy astronomersand mathematicians in Samarqand at the Sultan’s madrasa. Anotheraccount (by Kevin Krisciunas) states that “at the time Ulugh Beg’sobservatory flourished, it was carrying out the most advancedobservations and analysis being done anywhere. In the 1420s and1430s, Samarqand was the astronomical and mathematical capital ofthe world”. This is, by no means, an isolated example of the presenceof such dual-purpose madĀris in the Muslim world.It might be advanced that science has expanded and changed somuch since Ulugh Beg’s time that it is no longer possible for a personto master even one of its branches and simultaneously be a masterof religious sciences; that the students of madĀris, if required tostudy natural sciences in addition to the traditional curricula, will beneither ĂulamĀā nor scientists.This objection is invalid for two reasons: (i) what is beingproposed is a well-planned effort to institutionalize the study andpractice of natural sciences in certain madĀris in various parts ofthe Muslim world and not to turn all madĀris into dual-purposeinstitutions. Thus even though these dual-purpose madĀris may not

232 • The Making of Islamic Scienceproduce enough religious scholars of the same caliber as they nowdo, there will be other madĀris fulfilling that role; and (ii) grantedthat modern science has expanded and each of its branches hasbecome extremely demanding, there is yet no proof that its studyand practice is only possible at the expense of all other subjects; afterall, contemporary scientists emerge from institutions where theystudy many other disciplines before specializing in a given branchof science. There is absolutely no reason why a person who hasmemorized the Noble QurāĀn at the traditional young age of sevenor ten, and who has acquired sufficient grounding in one of the areasof religious sciences by the age of twenty along with an elementarystudy of natural sciences, cannot dedicate the next ten years of his orher life to master chemistry or physics or astronomy in an institutionwhere these sciences have become part and parcel of a new curriculabased on the Islamic view of nature.In any case, what is being proposed is not a fixed recipe but apractical solution that needs to be implemented through a creativeand dynamic collaboration between serious and dedicated scientists,social scientists, and religious scholars. What is needed as a firststep is the establishment of a new institution—a dual-purposemadrasa—where the vision of Islamic science can become a reality.This is certainly not too much to ask; ten or fifteen better-organizedand better-funded madĀris in moderately prosperous Muslim statessuch as Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Iran can be easilyturned into such institutions. These newly established dual-purposemadĀris can begin by attracting a certain number of accomplishedscientists, creative men and women trained as social scientists, andĂulamĀ, dedicated to the task of creatively exploring practical waysto establish a tradition of science anchored in the profound vision ofIslam as a fulfillment of a fară al-kifĀyah that no one has undertakenso far. A serious and dedicated initiative of this kind can easilyproduce visible results within a short period of time and certainlyby the time these dual-purpose madĀris produce their first crop ofĂulamĀā-scientists by 2025.Once sufficient creative links have been established betweenworking scientists, ĂulamĀ, Muslim thinkers, and social scientists,there would emerge natural affinities and intellectual links with

Afterword: Is Islamic Science Possible? • 233the centuries-old tradition of Islamic science and the whole processwill generate enough interest, momentum, and visible results thatwould stand out as viable alternatives to the results and products ofprofane science and technology that now dominate human existencein all parts of the world. Once the benefits of Islamic science becomeapparent, there will be sufficient and compulsive reasons for moreand more scientists to join this effort.Thus reclaiming its lost position, the reemerging tradition ofIslamic science would prove, by its sheer existence, that those whohave been its proponents in the lean years were not the inheritorsof wind but harbingers of a science immensely more beneficial thanthe one which has brought humanity and the planet to its presentabysmal state. In the presence of this conclusive proof of the viabilityand rigorous application of the Islamic vision of the natural world,all objections against the notion of Islamic science would be laid torest forever.z

Primary SourcesThe following material selected from primary sources has beenchosen to provide insights into various aspects of the Islamand science relationship that existed in the Islamic intellectualtradi tion before the rise of modern science. Other works of importance,which could not be included here for reasons of space,are listed in the annotated bibliography.—1—Ya‘qub ibn Ishaq al-Kindi, On First Philosophy (fi al-Falsafah al-Ula), Translated by Alfred L. Ivry, Albany:State University of New York Press, 1974, pp. 70–75.Abu Yusuf Ya‘qub ibn Ishaq al-Kindi was born in Kufa towardthe end of the eighth century or the beginning of the ninth to thegovernor of Kufa. His family was originally from the southern partof Arabia. His tribe, Kindah, was distinguished by the presence of aCompanion of the Prophet. By the time al-Kindi completed his earlystudies, Baghdad had become the intellectual capital of the world.Thus it was natural for him to go to Baghdad, where he enjoyedthe patronage of the caliphs al-Ma‘mun and al-Mu‘tasim, the latterappointed him his son’s tutor. Al-Kindi remained in high positionsthroughout his life except for the final years when court intrigues ledto misunderstanding between him and caliph Mutawakkil.

236 • The Making of Islamic ScienceThis led to the confiscation of his large library and a beating—both inci dents are sometimes taken as indication of persecution,even as proofs for “Islam against science and philosophy” doctrine.Historical data, however, clearly indicates that competing social,ethnic, and political interests were behind the episode. When he diedaround 870, al-Kindi’s fame spread throughout the Muslim worldand he was honored with the title of “the philosopher of the Arabs.”Although influenced by Aristotle, al-Kindi is an independent thinkerwho maintains several important and significant deviations fromAristotelian philosophy. He rejects the idea of the eternal universe,for instance. His concept of causality is also different from Aris totle,because he points to a fifth kind of causality. The following selectionfrom his On the First Philosophy presents his views on “motion.”zMotion is the motion of a body only:If there is a body, there is motion, and otherwise there would notbe motion. Motion is some change: the change of place (either) of theparts of a body and its center, or of all the parts of the body only, islocal motion; the change of place, to which the body is brought byits limits, either in nearness to or farness from its center, is increaseand decrease; the change only of its predicate qualities is alteration;and the change of its substance is generation and corruption. Everychange is a counting of the number of the duration of the body, allchange belonging to that which is temporal.If, therefore, there is motion, there is of necessity a body, while ifthere is a body, then there must of necessity either be motion or notbe motion.If there is a body and there was no motion, then either therewould be no motion at all, or it would not be, though it would bepossible for it to be. If there were no motion at all, then motion wouldnot be an existent. However, since body exists, motion is an existent,and this is an impos sible contradiction and it is not possible for thereto be no motion at all, if a body exists. If furthermore, when thereis an existing body, it is pos sible that there is existing motion, then

Primary Sources • 237motion necessarily exists in some bodies, for that which is possibleis that which exists in some possessors of its substance; as the (artof) writing which may be affirmed as a pos sibility for Muhammad,though it is not in him in actuality, since it does exist in some humansubstance, i.e., in another man. Motion, therefore, necessarily existsin some bodies, and exists in the simple body, exist ing necessarily inthe simple body; accordingly body exists and motion exists.Now it has been said that there may not be motion when a bodyexists. Accordingly, there will be motion when body exists, and therewill not be motion when body exists, and this is an absurdity and animpossible contradiction, and it is not possible for there to be bodyand not motion; thus, when there is a body there is motion necessarily.It is sometimes assumed that it is possible for the body of theuniverse to have been at rest originally, having the possibility to move,and then to have moved. This opinion, however, is false of necessity:for if the body of the universe was at rest originally and then moved,then (either) the body of the universe would have to be a generationfrom nothing or eternal.If it is a generation from nothing, the coming to be of being fromnothing being generation, then its becoming is motion in accordancewith our previous classification of motion, (viz.) that generation isone of the species of motion. If, then, body is not prior (to motion,motion) is (of) its essence and therefore the generation of a body cannever precede motion. It was said, however, to have been originallywithout motion: Thus it was, and no motion existed, and it was not,and no motion existed, and this is an impossible contradiction and itis impossible, if a body is a generation from nothing, for it to be priorto motion.If, on the other hand, the body (of the universe) is eternal, havingrested and then moved, it having had the possibility to move, then thebody of the universe, which is eternal, will have moved from actualrest to actual movement, whereas that which is eternal does not move,as we have explained previously. The body of the universe is thenmoving and not moving, and this is an impossible contradiction andit is not possible for the body of the universe to be eternal, resting inactuality, and then to have moved into movement in actuality.

238 • The Making of Islamic ScienceMotion, therefore, exists in the body of the universe, which,accordingly, is never prior to motion. Thus if there is motion there is,necessarily, a body, while if there is a body there is, necessarily, motion.It has been explained previously that time is not prior tomotion; nor, of necessity, is time prior to body, since there is no timeother than through motion, and since there is no body unless thereis motion and no motion unless there is body. Nor does body existwithout duration, since duration is that in which its being is, i.e.,that in which there is that which it is; and there is no duration ofbody unless there is motion, since body always occurs with motion,as has been explained. The duration of the body, which is alwaysa concomitant of the body, is counted by the motion of the body,which is (also) always a concomitant of the body. Body, therefore, isnever prior to time; and thus body, motion and time are never priorto one another.It has, in accordance with this, already been explained that it isimpossi ble for time to have infinity, since it is impossible for quantityor something which has quantity to have infinity in actuality. All timeis therefore finite in actuality, and since body is not prior to time, itis not possible for the body of the universe, due to its being, to haveinfinity. The being of the body of the universe is thus necessarilyfinite, and it is impossible for the body of the universe to be eternal.We shall, moreover, show this by means of another account—afterit has been explained by what we have say—which shall add to theskill of the investigators of this approach in their penetration (of it).We therefore say:Composition and combination are part of change, for they area joining and organizing of things. A body is a long, wide, deepsubstance, i.e., it possesses three dimensions. It is composed of thesubstance which is its genus, and of the long, wide and deep whichis its specific difference; and it is that which is composed of matterand form. Composition is the change of a state which itself is not acomposition; composition is motion, and if there was no motion, therewould not be composition. Body is, therefore, composite, and if therewas not motion there would not be body, and body and motion thusare not prior to one another.

Primary Sources • 239Through motion there is time, since motion is change; changeis the number of the duration of that which changes, and motionis a counting of the duration of that which changes. Time is aduration counted by motion, and every body has duration, as we saidpreviously, viz., that in which there is being, i.e., that in which thereis that which it is. Body is not prior to motion, as we have explained.Nor is body prior to duration, which is counted by motion. Body,motion and time are therefore not prior to one another in being,and they occur simultaneously in being. Thus if time is finite inactuality, then, necessarily, the being of a body is finite in actuality,if composition and harmonious arrangement are a kind of change,though if composition and harmonious arrangement were not a kindof change, this conclusion would not be necessary.Let us now explain in another way that it is not possible for timeto have infinity in actuality, either in the past or future. We say:Before every temporal segment there is (another) segment, untilwe reach a temporal segment before which there is no segment, i.e.,a seg mented duration before which there is no segmented duration.It cannot be otherwise—if it were possible, and after every segmentof time there was a segment, infinitely, then we would never reacha given time—for the duration from past infinity to this given timewould be equal to the duration from this given time regressing intimes to infinity; and if (the duration) from infinity to a definite timewas known, then (the duration) from this known time to temporalinfinity would be known, and then the infinite is finite, and this is animpossible contradiction.Furthermore, if a definite time cannot be reached until atime before it is reached, nor that before it until a time before it isreached, and so to infinity; and the infinite can neither be traversednor brought to an end; then the temporally infinite can never betraversed so as to reach a definite time. However its termination at adefinite time exists, and time is not an infinite segment, but rather isfinite necessarily, and therefore the duration of body is not infinite,and it is not possible for body to be without duration. Thus the beingof a body does not have infinity; the being of a body is, rather, finite,and it is impossible for body to be eternal.

240 • The Making of Islamic ScienceIt is (also) not possible for future time to have infinity inactuality: for if it is impossible for (the duration from) past time toa definite time to have infinity, as we have said previously; andtimes are consecutive, one time after another time, then whenever atime is added to a finite, definite time, the sum of the definite timeand its addition is definite. If, however, the sum was not definite,then something quantitatively definite would have been added tosomething (else) quantitatively definite, with something quantitativelyinfinite assembled by them.Time is a continuous quantity, i.e., it has a division common toits past and future. Its common division is the present, which is thelast limit of past time and the first limit of future time. Every definitetime has two limits: a first limit and last limit. If two definite timesare continuous through one limit common to them both, then theremaining limit of each one of them is definite and knowable. It has,however, been said that the sum of the two times will be indefinite; itwill then be both not limited by any termini and limited by termini,and this is an impossible contradiction. It is thus impossible, if adefinite time is added to a definite time, for the sum to be indefinite;and whenever a definite time is added to a definite time, all of it isdefinitely limited, to its last (segment). It is, therefore, impossible forfuture time to have infinity in actuality.—2—Ibn Sina–al-Biruni Correspondence, al-As‘ilah wa‘l-Ajwibah, Translated by Rafik Berjak and MuzaffarIqbal, Islam & Science, Vol. 1, Nos. 1 and 2, 2003, pp.91–98 and 253–60Writing from Khwarizm, the modern Khiva and ancient Chorasmia,Abu Rayyhan Muhammad b. Ahmad al-Biruni (973–1050) posedeighteen ques tions to Abu Ali al-Hasayn b. ‘Abd Allah ibn Sina(980–1037). Ten ques tions were related to various concepts and ideasin Aristotle’s De Caelo. Ibn Sina responded, answering each questionone by one in his character istic manner. Not satisfied by some ofthe answers, al-Biruni wrote back, commenting on the first eight

Primary Sources • 241answers from the first set and on the seven from the second. Thistime, the response came from Abu Said Ahmad ibn Ali al-Masumi,whose honorific title, Faqih, is indicative of his high status amongthe students of Ibn Sina. He wrote on behalf of his teacher, who wasthe most representative scholar of Islamic Peripatetic tradition. Thisen counter was rigorous and indicative of many important aspectsof Islamic philosophical and scientific traditions. It also shows howMuslim scholars and scientists worked out certain basic concepts innatural sciences.zIn the name of Allah the Most Merciful the Most Compassionate.The Grand Master, Abu Ali al-Hussein Abu Abdullah IbnSina—may Allah grant him mercy—said, All Praise is for Allah, theSustainer of the worlds, He suffices and He is the best Disposer ofaffairs, the Granter of victory, the Supporter. And Allah’s blessingsbe upon our master Muhammad and upon his family and all hiscompanions, and now to begin:This letter is in response to the questions sent to him by AbuRayhan al-Biruni from Khwarizm. May Allah surround you with allyou wish for, and may He grant you all you hope for and bestow onyou the happiness in this life, and hereafter, and save you from allyou dislike in both lives. You requested— may Allah prolong yoursafety—a clarification about matters some of which you considerworthy to be traced back to Aristotle, of which he spoke in his book,al-Sama‘ wa‘l-Alam (De caelo), and some of which you have found tobe problematic. I began to explain and clarify these briefly andconcisely, but some pressing matters inhibited me from elaboratingon each topic as it deserves. Further, the sending of the response toyou was delayed, awaiting al-Masumi’s dispatch of letter to you. Now, Iwould restate your questions in your own words, and then follow eachquestion with a brief answer.The first question: You asked—may Allah keep you happy—whyAristotle asserted that the heavenly bodies have neither levity norgravity and why did he deny absence of motion from and to the

242 • The Making of Islamic Sciencecenter. We can assume that since the heaven is among the heaviestbodies—and that is an assumption, not a certainty—it does notrequire a movement to the center because of a universal law thatapplies to all its parts judged as similar. If every part had a naturalmovement toward the center, and the parts were all connected, thenit would re sult in a cessation (wuquf) [of all motion] at the center.Likewise, we can assume that the heaven is among the lightest of allbodies, this would not necessitate (i) a movement from the centeruntil its parts have separated and (ii) the existence of vacuum outsidethe heaven. And if the nonexistence of vacuum outside the heavenis an established fact, then the heaven will be a composite body likefire. [And you also say] that the circular movement of the heaven,though possible, might not be natural like the natural movementof the planets to the east [which] is countered by a necessary andforceful movement to the west. If it is said that this movement is notencountered because there is no contradiction between the circularmovements and there is no dispute about their directions, then it isjust deception and argument for the sake of argument, because itcannot be imagined that one thing has two natural movements, oneto the east and one to the west. And this is nothing but a semanticdispute with agreement on the meaning, because you cannot namethe movement toward the west as opposite of the movement to theeast. And this is a given; even if we do not agree on the semantics, letus deal with the meaning.The answer: May Allah keep you happy, you have saved me thetrouble of proving that heaven has neither levity nor gravity, becausein your prelude you have accepted that there is no place above theheaven to where it can move, and it cannot, likewise, move belowbecause all its parts are connected. I say it is also not possible for it tomove down, nor is there a natural place below it to where it can move,and even if it were separated—and we can make the assumption thatit is separated—it would result in the movement of all the elementsfrom their natural positions and this is not permissible, neither bythe divine nor by the natural laws. And that would also establishvacuum which is not permissi ble in the natural laws. Therefore, theheaven does not have a natural position below or above to which itcan move in actuality (bi‘l fil) or in being, neither is it in the realm of

Primary Sources • 243possibility (bi‘l-imkan) or imagination (bi‘l-wahm) because that wouldlead to unacceptable impossibilities we have mentioned, I mean themovement of all the elements from their natural positions or theexistence of vacuum.There is nothing more absurd than what cannot be proved toexist either by actuality or by possibility or imagination. If we acceptthis, it follows that heaven does not have a natural position, neitherat the top nor at the bottom. But every body has a natural position.And to this, we add a minor term and that is our saying: “heavenis a body”, and hence, it will follow from the first kind of syllogism(shakl) that heaven has a natural position. And if we could transferthe conclusion to the disjunctive positional syllogism, we could thensay: its natural position is above or below or where it is. And if wehypothesize the negation of its being either above or below, we couldsay: it is neither up nor down; hence the conclusion is: it is where it is.Everything in its natural position is neither dense or light inactuality and since heaven is in its natural position, it is, therefore,neither light nor dense in actuality. The proof of this is that whateveris in its natural position and is light, it will be moved upward becauseit is light and its natural position is upward but it cannot be said thatwhatever is light, is in its natural position in actuality because thiswill contradict what I have just said: it will be “in its natural position”as well as “not in its natural position” at the same time; and that isself-contradictory. And likewise for the dense. Because the dense iswhat naturally moves downwards and its natural position is downbecause anything that moves naturally, its movement takes it towardits natural position. And from the first premise, it is clear that thething in its natural position is not dense in actuality, so when we addthe results of the two premises, the sum of this will be that whateveris in its natural position, is neither dense nor light in actuality. Andit was established in the second minor term that the heaven is trulyin its natural position, therefore, the correct logical conclusion isthat the heaven is neither light nor dense in actuality and it is not sopotentially (bi‘l-quwwa) or contingently.The proof of this is that the light and dense in potentia can be soin two situations: (i) It can be so either as a whole, like the parts of thefixed elements in their natural position, so if they were neither dense

244 • The Making of Islamic Sciencenor light in actuality, then they are so potentially, for the possibilityof their movement by a compulsory motion which can cause them tomove from and to their natural position either by an ascending ordescending natural movement; and (ii) by considering the parts asopposed to the whole in the fixed elements. These parts are neitherlight nor dense in their totalities, because if it would move upward,some of the parts would move downward because they are sphericalin their shapes and have many dimensions, but indeed, the levity anddensity are in their parts, so if the heaven is light or heavy potentially,that is in its totality—and we have proved that by nature, the upwardor downward movement of the heaven is negated (maslub) to itstotality, and to prove that we depended on some of your premises. Soit was made clear to us that the heaven in its totality is neither lightnor dense. And I say that it is neither heavy nor light potentially inits parts be cause the levity and the density of the heavy and the lightparts appear in their natural movement to their natural position.And the parts which are moving to their natural position move intwo cases: (i) they might be moving from their natural position byforce, [in which case] they would move back to their natural positionby nature or (ii) they are being created and moving to their naturalpo sition like the fire that emerges from the oil and is moving up. It isnot possible for a part of the heaven to move from its natural positionby force because that requires an outside mover, a corporeal or noncorporealmover that is not from itself.The non-corporeal movers, like what the philosophers callnature and the active intellect (al-aql al-faal), and the First Cause(al-illatul ula), are not supposed to create forced movement (harakahqasriyyah); as for nature, it is self-evident, and as for the intellectand the First Cause, their inability [to do so] is left to the Divineknowledge. As for the physical cause, it should be, if possible, oneof the [four] elements or composed of them because there is nocorporeal body other than these five—the four simple elements and[the fifth being] their combination.And every body that moves by itself and not by accident, moveswhen it is touched by an active mover. And this has been explainedin detail in the first chapter in the book of Generation and Corruption(Kitab al-kawn wa‘l-fasad). Thus, it is not possible for a part of the

Primary Sources • 245heaven to move without being touched by the mover during itsmovement toward it either by force (bi‘l-qasr), or by nature (bi‘l-tab).The outside mover that moves it by force has to be connected toanother mover, which in turn, has to be connected to the first mover ofall. And if it was moving by nature, it will be either the non-compositefire or a combination in which the fire-parts are dominant. The noncompositefire does not affect the heaven because it engulfs it fromall sides and the impact of bodies on bodies is by touch and there isno part in the heaven which is more passive than the other, unlessone of the parts is weaker in its nature. However, the weakness of thesubstance does not come from itself but through an outside factor.Thus, the question now returns to the beginning, to that of acompound mover in which the fire-part is dominant. It will nothave impact until it reaches the sphere of the heaven and when itreaches the airy zone, then it will turn into pure fire and burst intoa flame as seen in the case of comets. And if it is too slow to reachthat transforming stage, it would not touch the heaven, [it may be so]because in it are dense parts, earthly and others, which have gravity.Thus, it is not possible for anything to touch the heaven except purefire. It is possible for pure or non-pure fire—and the compound isnot pure fire—and for the one that is not pure fire it is possible for itto be in the neighborhood of the three elements but it is not possiblefor it to touch the heaven by nature.As for the other elements, it is not possible for them to touch theheaven in their totality because they do not move in their totalityfrom their natural position, neither in their compound form nor intheir parts, thus, they cannot have any impact on the heaven becausethey are unable to touch it because when they reach the ether (alathir),they will burn and turn into fire and the fire does not touchheaven, as we have proved. But ether changes and disjoins everythingthat occurs in its [realm] because it is hot in actuality and one ofthe properties of the hotness in actuality is that it brings togethersimilar genera and separates dissimilar genera—it is the separator ofdissimilar and gatherer of similar genera. And when the fire takesover a body that is being affected by it, if it were a compound bodymade from different parts, the fire will return it to its nature; thisshows that [the body] did not change into something that is contrary

246 • The Making of Islamic Scienceto its essence by mixing with the affective element. As for the cold, it isnot like this. And there is no doubt that the hot is most effective andpowerful of all things; and the thing that is in its natural position,strengthens its genus; and the whole is stronger than its parts. Sowhat do you think of something that is hot in its natural position andit is whole, and it allows a part to enter into its sphere and it does notproduce any effect [on this part], neither changes it back to its nature,nor separates it, if it were compound?From these premises, it is clear that it is not possible for any partor compound from the elements to reach the heaven. Since they donot reach it, they do not touch it, and if they do not touch it, theydo not produce any effect on it. None of the parts or the compoundshas any effect on parts of the heaven and if nothing is able to affectit, other than it, from whole or parts, simple or compound bodies, itis not going to be affected and moved potentially by itself. And if wewould set aside our premise—and that is our saying, “and it is notpossible [for the heaven] to be affected by anything other than byitself”, which is true—the re sult is our saying: “it is not possible thatit will be affected and moved by force”; and this is also true. So theheaven is neither light, nor dense potentially, neither as a whole or inits parts. And we have proved that it is not so in actuality. It is neitherlight, nor dense in general or absolutely. And that is what we wantedto clarify. But you can call the heaven light from the perspective inwhich people call a floating body, on top of another body, lighterthan the latter by nature. So, from this perspective, it is possible thatthe heaven is the lightest of all things.Now, as to your saying that the circular motion [of the heaven] isnatural to it, and your saying, “if it is said that this is not accidentally”et cetera, there is no one among the scholars who has proven thenatural circular motion of the heaven, who has ascertained whatyou have said. I would have explained the reasons, had it not been aseparate issue, taking too long [to explain].As for your demonstration that the movement of the stars andthe planets is opposite, it is not so. It is only different. Because theopposite movements are opposite in the directions and the ends,and if it was not that the high is opposite of low, then we wouldnot have said that the movement from the center is opposite of themovement to the center; and this has been explained in detail in

Primary Sources • 247the fifth chapter of Kitab al-Sama al-tabii. As for the directions of thetwo circular motions and their ends, they are, in our assumption,positional, not natural. Because in nature, there is no end to thecircular movement of the heaven, hence it is not opposite; hence thetwo different circular motions are not opposite and this is what wewanted to clarify.—3—Abu Ali al-Husayn ibn Abd Allah Ibn Sina, The Canonof Medicine (al-Qanun fi‘l tibb), Adapted by LalehBakhtiar from Translation by O. Cameron Grunerand Mazar H. Shah, Chicago: Kazi Publications, 1930[reprint 1999], pp. 11–14.The “Prince of Physicians,” as Ibn Sina was called by hiscontemporaries and later generations, from whose Canon thefollowing selection has been made, was born in Afshana near Bukhara(in present-day Uzbekistan) in 980 and died in Hamadan in presentdayIran in 1037. Al-Qanun fi‘l tibb, his magnum opus in medicine,was first translated into Latin by Gerard of Cremona and in spite ofenormously large size, it was printed in Latin at least a dozen timesbefore 1501. It was translated into Hebrew by Nathan ha-Me‘ati,published in Rome in 1279. The first Arabic edition to be publishedin Europe is one of the Arabic incunabula (extant copies of booksproduced in the earliest stages, i.e. before 1501, of printing frommovable type), a splendid folio printed by the Typographia Mediccain Rome in 1593 (Sarton 1955, 42). Once translated into Latin,the Canon was to quickly gain the status of a classic in medicine. Itremained one of the most used texts for the next four centuries. “Thefame of Avicenna was so great that medical progress did not shakeit and there was still a professional market for the Canon during thewhole of the seventeenth century”(Sarton 1955, 44).The following selection from Book I provides insights into IbnSina’s philosophy of medicine.z

248 • The Making of Islamic Science1.2. Concerning the Subject-Matter of Medicine§12 Medicine deals with the states of health and disease in thehuman body. It is a truism of philosophy that a complete knowledgeof a thing can only be obtained by elucidating its causes andantecedents, provided, of course, such causes exist. In medicineit is, therefore, necessary that causes of both health and diseaseshould be determined.§13 Sometimes these causes are obvious to the senses but atother times they may defy direct observation. In such circumstances,causes and an tecedents have to be carefully inferred from the signsand symptoms of the disease. Hence, a description of the signsand symptoms of disease is also necessary for our purpose. It is adictum of the exact sciences that knowledge of a thing is attainedonly through a knowledge of the causes and origins of the causes,assuming there to be causes and origins. Con sequently our knowledgecannot be complete without an understanding both of symptoms andof the principles of being.1.3. The Causes of Health and Disease§14 There are four causes—material, efficient, formal, and final.On the subject of health and disease, we have the following:1.3.1. The Material Causes§15 The material (maddi) cause is the physical body which is thesubject of health and disease. This may be immediate as the organsof body together with their vital energies and remote as the humorsand remoter than these, the elements which are the basis both forstructure and change (or dynamicity). Things which thus provide abasis (for health and disease) get so thoroughly altered and integratedthat from an initial diversity there emerges a holistic unity with aspecific structure (or the quantitative pattern of organization) and aspecific type of temperament (the qualitative pattern).1.3.2. The Efficient Causes§16 The efficient (failiya) causes are capable of either preventingor inducing change in the human body. They may be external tothe per son or internal. External causes are: age, sex, occupation,residence, and climate and other agents which effect the human bodyby contact whether contrary to nature or not. Internal causes aresleep and wake fulness, evacuation of secretions and excretions, the

Primary Sources • 249changes at differ ent periods of life in occupation, habits and customs,ethnic group and nationality.1.3.3. The Formal Causes§§17 The formal (suriyah) causes are three: temperaments (mizajat)(or the pattern of constitution as a whole) and the faculties or drives(qawa) which emerge from it and the structure (the quantitativepatterns).1.3.4. The Final Causes§18 The final (tamamia) causes are the actions or functions. Theycan be understood only from a knowledge of both the facultiesor drives (qawa) and the vital energies (breaths, arwah) that areultimately responsible for them. These will be described presently.1.4. Other Factors to Consider§19 A knowledge of the above-mentioned causes gives one insightinto how the body is maintained in a state of health and how itbecomes ill. A full understanding of just how health is conserved orsickness removed de pends on understanding the underlying causesof each of these states and of their “instruments.” For example, thediet in regard to food, drink, choice of climate, regulations regardingwork and rest, the use of medicines, or operative interference.Physicians treat all these points under three head ings as will bereferred to later: health, sickness, and a state intermediate betweenthe two. But we say that the state which they call intermediate is notreally a mean between the other two.§20 As the aim of medicine is to preserve health and eradicatedisease, there are some other factors which deserve consideration: (1)the elements;(2) the temperaments; (3) the humors or body fluids; (4) thetissues and organs-simple and composite; (5) the breaths and theirnatural, nervous and vital faculty or drives; (6) the functions; (7) thestates of the body health, sickness, intermediate conditions; and (8)their causes: food, drink, air, water, localities of residence, exercise,repose, age, sex, occupation, customs, race, evacuation, retention andthe external accidents to which the body is exposed from without;(9) the diet in regard to food, drink, medicines; exercises directed topreserving health; and (10) the treatment for each disorder.

250 • The Making of Islamic Science§21 With regard to some of these things there is nothing aphysician can do, yet he should recognize what they are and whatis their essential nature, whether they are really existent or not. Fora knowledge of some things, he depends on the doctor of physicalscience; in the case of other things, knowledge is derived byinference or reasoning. One must presuppose a knowledge of theaccepted principles of the respective sciences of origins in order toknow whether they are worthy of credence or not; and one makesinferences from the other sciences which are logically antecedent tothese. In this manner one proceeds step by step until one reachesthe very beginnings of knowledge, namely pure philosophy; to wit,metaphysics.§22 Things which the medical practitioner should acceptwithout proof and recognize as being true are: (1) the elements andtheir number; (2) the existence of temperament and its varieties;(3) humors, their number and location; (4) faculty or drives, theirnumber and location; (5) vital forces, their number and location; and(6) the general law that a state cannot exist without a cause and thefour causes. Things which have to be inferred and proved by reasonare: (1) diseases; (2) their causes; (3) symptoms;(4) treatment; and (5) their appropriate methods of prevention.Some of these matters have to be fully explained by reason inreference to both amount (miqdar) and time (waqt).§23 If a physician like Galen attempted a logical explanation ofthese hy potheses, he would be discussing the subject not as a medicalpractitioner, but as a philosopher, and in this way would be like ajurist trying to justify the validity of, say, consensus of opinion. Ofcourse, this he might do, not as a jurist but as a man of knowledge.However, it is not possible either for a medical practitioner, as such, ora jurist in his own capacity, to prove such matters by logic and reason;and if he does so, it will be at his own peril.§24 The physician must also know how to arrive at conclusionscon cerning: (1) the causes of illnesses and the individual signs thereof;and (2) the method (most likely to) remove the disorder and so restorehealth. Wherever they are obscure, he must be able to assign to themtheir dura tion, and recognize their phases.

Primary Sources • 251—4 —Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Tufayl, Hayy ibn Yaqzan,ed. L´eon Gauthier, Beirut, 1936, pp. 70–78, translatedby Yashab Tur.Born around 1100 in Wadi Ash, a small town northeast of Granada,Abu Bakr bin Abd al-Malik bin Muhammad bin Muhammad binTufail al-Qaisi (known to the Muslim world as Ibn Tufail and to theLatin West as Abubacer) was a man of many gifts. He practiced andtaught medicine, and was a philosopher, a mathematician, a poet,and a man of great imag ination. He was a teacher of Ibn Rushd, anadvisor and court physician first in Granda and later at the court ofPrince Abu Sa‘d Yusuf, Sultan of the Muwahidin in Morocco, wherehe died in 1185.His masterpiece, Hayy Ibn Yaqzan (Living the Son of the Awake), isan imaginative tale of an infant who is cast ashore upon an equatorialisland because his birth has to be concealed. He is suckled by a doeand spends the first fifty years of his life without contact with anyhuman being. His solitary life, which is presented as consisting ofseven stages of seven years, is full of reflections on nature amidstcontinuously emerging new needs which must be met in order tosurvive. Through his reflections and in the very process of fulfillmentof his needs, Hayy is led to such profound concepts as soul and itsCreator. This intellectual apprehension of truth is followed by anexperiential realization of Reality.Soon after this leap, Hayy comes into contact with another humanbeing, a spiritually endowed man by the name of Asal who arrives onthe island in search of solitude to contemplate the ultimate nature ofthings. Hayy and Asal find congenial companionship in each otherand realize that they have both arrived at the same Truth, each in hisown way. Asal tells Hayy about how human society is structured andthis produces in Hayy a desire to go to other human beings and showthem the real nature of life. A ship arrives in due course of time andthey both leave their solitary life for the island where Asal lived andwhere his friend, Salaman, rules. Hayy preaches to Asal’s community,but in time realizes that the truth he has acquired must be acquiredby each human being in his or her own personal manner; it cannot

252 • The Making of Islamic Sciencebe transmitted by preaching. He then departs with Asal to resume alife of contemplation in the solitude of the island where he had livedmost of his life.Ibn Tufail’s imaginative tale is an attempt to show that knowledgeof the Truth gained through the intellect and reason does notcontradict what is apprehended through mystical experience. Thetale is based on an earlier work of the same title by Ibn Sina. It isrooted in the Islamic concept of fitrah, the innate nature of humanbeings, and in the QurāĀnic message that when left to itself, humanintellect is capable of comprehending the ultimate Reality which isnone other than One God. What is shown through the experiencesof Hayy is, therefore, a confirmation of the process of convergence ofsound reasoning, observation, and experiences.zHe searched for some common characteristic in all physical objects,ani mate and inanimate, but could find nothing except their extensionin three dimensions. He recognized this as a physical property sinceall objects were physical. His senses did not find any object whichhad just this and no other characteristic. On further examiningthis notion by asking him self [pertinent questions] such as whetheror not another principle existed besides extension, he realized thatthere must be another factor, besides ex tension, to which extension isattached. For mere extension could no more subsist by itself than theextended object could exist without extension.Hayy tried out this idea on several objects which had form.When he examined clay, he discovered that if he molded it into someshape, for ex ample into a ball, it had length, width, and depth in acertain proportion; if he then took this ball and formed a cube oran egg-shaped object, its length, width, and depth still existed, butnow they took on different proportions, though it was still the sameclay. No matter what the proportion of length, width, and depth, theobject could not be divested of these properties alto gether. Since oneproportion could replace another, it became apparent to him that thedimensions were a factor in their own right, distinct from the clay

Primary Sources • 253itself. But the fact that the clay was never totally devoid of dimensionsmade it clear to him that they were part of its being [as clay].His experiments led him to believe that all bodies are composedof two things: (i) a thing similar to clay in his experiment on the clay,and (ii) the three extensions (length, width, and depth) of the forminto which clay or any other object is formed. This could be a ball, ablock, or another figure the clay might have. Thus, he realized thathe could not comprehend physical things at all unless he conceivedof them as compounded of these two factors, neither of which couldsubsist without the other.He deduced that there is a variable factor—the form of the bodies.This can have many different faces, and three properties of extension(length, width, and depth) correspond to this form. The other factor,which remains constant like the clay of the example, corresponds tomateriality in all other bodies. In philosophy the factor analogous tothe clay is called hyle,or matter. This is pure matter, devoid of forms.Now that his thinking had achieved a certain level ofsophistication and he could use the faculties of his mind, he feltalien and alone because the sensory world had now receded to someextent. This produced a longing for the familiar world of the senses.He disliked the notion of the unqualified body—a thing he couldneither possess nor hold. He reverted to the four simple objects hehad already examined.First he reexamined water. He found that when left to itself, in itsown natural form, it was cold and moved downward; but if warmed byfire or the heat of the sun, its coldness departed, only its tendency tofall re mained as its property. If it were heated vigorously, this secondproperty also disappeared; in fact, now [water] gained the [opposite]tendency: it rose upward. In this way, both primary properties of waterwere changed. He concluded that once the two original propertieswere gone, the form of water must have left this body, since it nowexhibited behavior character istic of some other form. Hence, a newform, not previously present, must have come into existence, givingrise to behavior unlike that it had shown under its original form.Hayy now knew for sure that all that comes into existence musthave a cause. A vague and diffused notion of cause of forms nowappeared to him. He went over the forms he had known beforeand realized that all of these forms had come into existence due to

254 • The Making of Islamic Sciencesome cause. Examining the essence of each form, he realized thatthe essence of each form was nothing but the potential of a body toproduce actions. The object in which a form would inhere, he thusrealized, was a body’s propensity for an action. Water has a propensityto rise when heated; this propensity is contained in its form. Thecapacity of an object to inhere certain actions—and not others—resides in its form.Hayy concluded that his observation would be true of all forms.Actions emerging from forms did not arise in them; all actionsattributed to them were actually brought about through them byanother Being. This idea to which Hayy had now achieved certitudeis the same as the one found in the Prophet’s words: “I am the earsHe hears by and the sight He sees with. It is also mentioned in theperfect Revelation: It was not you but God who killed them; and when youshot, it was not you who shot, but God.(Q. al-Anfa‘al: 17)Having achieved this general notion of cause, Hayy developed anin tense longing to know more about it. He had not yet left the world ofsenses, hence he first tried to find some ultimate Cause in the sensoryworld. He did not yet know if this ultimate Cause of all things was oneor many. He reexamined all the objects he had examined before anddecided that they had all come into existence at some point and thendecayed either totally or in part. Water and earth, for example, aredestroyed in part by fire. Air changes into snow when it is very coldand snow into water when it warms. Nothing around him was exemptfrom change, and no change existed without a specific cause.Hayy now left behind all things he had examined and turned hismind to the heavenly bodies. He had now lived four seven-year cyclesand was a man of twenty-eight years.At the outset, he knew that the heavens and all the stars werebodies, because without exception they were extended in threedimensions, and whatever extended in three dimensions is a body.Therefore they were all bodies. The question he now pondered onwas whether they extended infinitely in all directions or were theyfinite—bounded at some point beyond which there was no extension.This problem perplexed him a great deal, but ultimately his inbornintelligence led him to conclude that an infinite body is a propensity,which can neither exist nor be conceived. This conclusion was

Primary Sources • 255confirmed in his mind by a number of factors which he consideredthrough a reflective approach.“This heavenly body I see,” he said to himself, “is without doubtfinite on the side which I see; my eyes and all other senses tell methis. I cannot doubt this. As to the side I cannot see, it will either befinite or infinite. But it cannot be infinite because it is impossible foranything to extend forever. If I were to start two lines from the finiteside of the body and let them go through the thickness of the body,if it were infinite, the two lines will go on through the thickness toinfinity. Suppose, now I cut off a large segment of one line from thefinite end, then reexamine both lines.There are two possibilities: Either both lines still extend toinfinity, or the cut line does not extend as far as the uncut line. Ifthey both still extended to infinity, it would mean that the line withthe cut off segment is still of the same length as the other—this is notpossible as a part cannot be equal to a whole.“The other possibility is that the line that has been cut is shorterthan the uncut line. This would mean that it is finite. The segmentthat I had cut off is finite. But if that is finite, the whole must be finite.And if this whole line [which was cut into two segments] is finite, theuncut line must also be finite, because both lines were equal to beginwith. This can be applied to all physical things. Thus to assume thatany object can be infinite is false and absurd.”This is how he reached the conclusion, through his exceptionalintelli gence, that heavens must be finite. Hayy now longed to discoverthe shape of the heavens and their limiting distances. Therefore hewatched the sun, the moon, and other stars. He observed that theyall rose in the east and set in the west. Those which traveled directlyoverhead inscribed a great arc while those inclining north or southfrom his zenith, inscribed a smaller arc. The further they lay fromthe zenith and the closer to the poles, the smaller the arc theytraversed. The smallest orbits in which stars moved were those thatwe call Ursa Minor and Canopus, two little circles about the Northand South Poles respectively. As already mentioned, Hayy’s island wason the equator, and therefore all these circles—whether they lay tothe north or south—were visible to him.

256 • The Making of Islamic Science—5—Abu al-Waleed Muhammad Ibn Rushd, Tahafutal-Tahafut (The Incoherence of the Incoherence),Translated from the Arabic with Introduction andNotes by Simon van den Bergh, 2 vols. London:Messrs. Luzac & Co., 1954, pp. 311–16.Abu al-Waleed Ibn Rushd (1126–1198), known to the Latin West asAverroes, was called the commentator because of his excellent commentarieson Aristotle. He was born to a distinguished family of juristsand was himself a jurist and physician. He produced works onmedicine, jurisprudence, and philosophy. His most important work,Incoherence of the Incoherence, from which the following excerpt istaken, was written as an extensive response to the famous work ofAbu Hamid al-Ghazali (1058– 1111), Incoherence of the Philosophers.In much of the secondary literature on Islam and science written inthe West, al-Ghazali’s Incoherence of the Philoso phers is often held asthe main culprit for the decline of science in Islamic civilization. Itis, therefore, interesting to read Ibn Rushd’s response to this work,which first quotes al-Ghazali’s arguments and then responds to it.In a way, this can be seen as a debate between two of the greatestminds in Islamic tradition, al-Ghazali and Ibn Rushd. It is interestingto note that al-Ghazali’s work tackles twenty issues, out of whichonly the last four are about the natural sciences. The main chargeagainst al-Ghazali is that he destroyed science in Islamic civilizationby destroying causal relations. As can be seen from the followingexcerpt, al-Ghazali is in fact advocating an occasionalist view. He doesso to preserve the Islamic view of miracles. The debate is, therefore,not really on science per se, but on the limits of ra tional inquiry intometa-scientific matters. In terms of causality, al-Ghazali holds thatevery time fire burns cotton, the fire itself does not produce theburning effects; they are caused directly by God. It is in God’s powerto stop fire from producing these habitual effects, if and when He sowishes. This accounts for the presence of miracles.Ibn Rushd responds by pointing out that a denial of directcausation would destroy the fixed natures. If fire no longer has the

Primary Sources • 257causal power of burning, then there is nothing to distinguish it fromother things such as water or earth. Consequently, we can no longerdifferentiate one thing from another in any real sense. This amountsto a destruction of peculiar and distinctive nature of individualsubstances and hence we can no longer have any real knowledge of thenatural world. Thus, the removal of the cause-and-effect relationshipleads to the removal of the possibility of knowledge of nature.zAbout the Natural SciencesGhazali says:The so-called natural sciences are many, and we shall enumeratetheir parts, in order to make it known that the Holy Law does notask one to contest and refute them, except in certain points we shallmention. They are divided into principal classes and subdivisions. Theprincipal classes are eight. In the first class are treated the divisibility,movement, and change which affect body in so far as it is body, andthe relations and consequences of movement like time, space, andvoid, and all this is contained in Aristotle’s Physics. The second treatsof the disposition of the parts of the elements of the world, namelyheaven and the four elements which are within the sphere of themoon, and their natures and the cause of the disposition of each ofthem in a definite place; and this is contained in Aristotle’s De coelo.The third treats of the conditions of generation and corruption, ofequivocal generation and of sexual generation, of growth and decay,of transmutations, and how the species are conserved, whereas theindividuals perish through the two heavenly movements (westwardsand eastwards), and this is contained in De generatione et corruptione.The fourth treats of the conditions which are found in the fourelements through their mixture, by which there occur meteorologicalphenomena like clouds and rain and thunder, lightning, the haloround the moon, the rainbow, thunderbolts, winds, and earthquakes.The fifth treats of mineralogy, the sixth of botany. The seventh treatsof zoology, which is contained in the book Historic animalium. The

258 • The Making of Islamic Scienceeighth treats of the soul of animals and the pe rceptive faculties, andsays that the soul of man does not die through the death of his bodybut that it is a spiritual substance for which annihilation is impossible.The subdivisions are seven: The first is medicine, whose end isthe knowledge of the principles of the human body and its conditionsof health and illness, their causes and symptoms, so that illness maybe expelled and health preserved. The second, judicial astrology,which conjectures from the aspects and configuration of the starsthe conditions which will be found in the world and in the Stateand the consequences of dates of births and of years. The third isphysiognomy, which infers character from the external appearance.The fourth is dream-interpretation, which infers what the soulhas witnessed of the world of the occult from dream images, forthe imaginative faculty imagines this symbolically. The fifth is thetelesmatical art, that is the combination of celestial virtues with someearthly so as to constitute a power which can perform marvelous actsin the earthly world. The sixth is the art of incantation, which is themixing of the virtues of earthly substances to produce marvelousthings from them. The seventh is alchemy, whose aim is to changethe properties of minerals so that finally gold and silver are producedby a kind of magic. And there is no need to be opposed to any ofthese sciences by reason of the Divine Law; we dissent from thephilosophers in all these sciences in regard to four points only.I say:As to his enumeration of the eight kinds of physical science, thisis exact according to the doctrine of Aristotle. But his enumerationof the subdivisions is not correct. Medicine is not one of the naturalsciences, but is a practical science which takes its principles fromphysical science; for physical science is theoretical and medicineis practical, and when we study a problem common to theoreticalscience and practical we can regard it from two points of view; forinstance, in our study of health and illness the student of physicsobserves health and nature as kinds of natural existents, whereasthe physician studies them with the intention of preserving the one,health, and keeping down the other, illness. Neither does judicialastrology belong to physical science; it is only a prognostication offuture events, and is of the same type as augury and vaticination.

Primary Sources • 259Physiognomy is also of the same kind, except that its object is occultthings in the present, not in the future. The interpretation of dreamstoo is a prognosticating science, and this type belongs neither to thetheoretical nor to the practical sciences, although it is reputed tohave a practical value. The telesmatical art is vain, for if we assumethe positions of the spheres to exert a power on artificial products,this power will remain inside the product and not pass on to thingsoutside it. As to conjuring, this is the type of thing that produceswonder, but it is certainly not a theoretical science. Whether alchemyreally exists is very dubious; if it exists, its artificial product cannot beidentical with the product of nature; art can at most become similarto nature but cannot attain nature itself in reality. As to the questionwhether it can produce anything which resembles the natural productgenerically, we do not possess sufficient data to assert categoricallyits impossibility or possibility, but only prolonged experiments overa lengthy period can procure the necessary evidence. I shall treat thefour points Ghazali mentions one after the other.Ghazali says :The first point is their assertion that this connection observedbetween causes and effects is of logical necessity, and that theexistence of the cause without the effect or the effect without the causeis not within the realm of the contingent and possible. The secondpoint is their assertion that human souls are substances existing bythemselves, not imprinted on the body, and that the meaning ofdeath is the end of their attachment to the body and the end of theirdirection of the body; and that otherwise the soul would exist at anytime by itself. They affirm that this is known by demon strative proof.The third point is their assertion that these souls cannot cease toexist, but that when they exist they are eternal and their annihi lationcannot be conceived. The fourth point is their assertion that thesesouls cannot return to their bodies.As to the first point, it is necessary to contest it, for on its negationde pends the possibility of affirming the existence of miracles whichinterrupt the usual course of nature, like the changing of the rodinto a serpent or the resurrection of the dead or the cleavage of themoon and those who consider the ordinary course of nature a logicalnecessity regard all this as impossible. They interpret the resurrection

260 • The Making of Islamic Scienceof the dead in the Koran by saying that the cessation of the death ofignorance is to be understood by it, and the rod which conceived thearch-deceiver, the serpent, by saying that it means the clear divineproof in the hands of Moses to refute the false doctrines of theheretics; and as to the cleavage of the moon they often deny that ittook place and assert that it does not rest on a sound tradition; andthe philosophers accept miracles that interrupt the usual course ofnature only in three cases.First: in respect to the imaginative faculty they say that whenthis faculty becomes predominant and strong, and the senses andperceptions do not submerge it, it observes the Indelible Tablet, andthe forms of particular events which will happen in the future becomeimprinted on it; and that this happens to the prophets in a wakingcondition and to other people in sleep, and that this is a peculiarquality of the imaginative faculty in prophecy.Secondly: in respect of a property of the rational speculativefaculty i.e. intellectual acuteness, that is rapidity in passing from oneknown thing to another; for often when a problem which has beenproved is mentioned to a keen-sighted man he is at once aware ofits proof, and when the proof is mentioned to him he understandswhat is proved by himself, and in general when the middle termoccurs to him he is at once aware of the conclusion, and when thetwo terms of the conclusion are present in his mind the middle termwhich connects the two terms of the conclusion occurs to him. Andin this matter people are different; there are those who understandby themselves, those who understand when the slightest hint isgiven to them, and those who, being instructed, understand onlyafter much trouble; and while on the one hand it may be assumedthat incapac ity to understand can reach such a degree that a mandoes not understand anything at all and has, although instructed,no disposition whatever to grasp the intelligibles, it may on theother hand be assumed that his ca pacity and proficiency may beso great as to arrive at a comprehension of all the intelligibles orthe majority of them in the shortest and quickest time. And thisdifference exists quantitatively over all or certain problems, andqualitatively so that there is an excellence in quickness and easiness,and the understanding of a holy and pure soul may reach through its

Primary Sources • 261acuteness all intelligibles in the shortest time possible; and this is thesoul of a prophet, who possesses a miraculous speculative faculty andso far as the intelligibles are concerned is not in need of a teacher;but it is as if he learned by himself, and he it is who is described bythe words the oil of which would well-nigh give light though no fire were incontact with it, light upon light.Thirdly: in respect to a practical psychological faculty which canreach such a pitch as to influence and subject the things of nature:for instance, when our soul imagines something the limbs and thepotencies in these limbs obey it and move in the required directionwhich we imagine, so that when a man imagines something sweetof taste the corners of his mouth begin to water, and the potencywhich brings forth the saliva from the places where it is springs intoaction, and when coitus is imagined the copulative potency springsinto action, and the penis extends; indeed, when a man walks ona plank between two walls over an empty space, his imagination isstirred by the possibility of falling and his body is impressed by thisimagination and in fact he falls, but when this plank is on the earth,he walks over it without falling. This happens because the body andthe bodily faculties are created to be subservient and subordinateto the soul, and there is a difference here according to the purityand the power of the souls. And it is not impossible that the powerof the soul should reach such a degree that also the natural powerof things outside a man’s body obeys it, since the soul of man is notimpressed on his body although there is created in man’s nature acertain impulse and desire to govern his body. And if it is possiblethat the limbs of his body should obey him, it is not impossible thatother things besides his body should obey him and that his soulshould control the blasts of the wind or the downpour of rain, or thestriking of a thunderbolt or the trembling of the earth, which causesa land to be swallowed up with its inhabitants. The same is the casewith his influence in producing cold or warmth or a movement inthe air; this warmth or cold comes about through his soul, all thesethings occur without any apparent physical cause, and such a thingwill be a miracle brought about by a prophet. But this only happensin matters disposed to receive it, and cannot attain such a scale thatwood could be changed into an animal or that the moon, which

262 • The Making of Islamic Sciencecannot undergo cleavage, could be cloven. This is their theory ofmiracles, and we do not deny anything they have mentioned, andthat such things happen to prophets; we are only opposed to theirlimiting themselves to this, and to their denial of the possibility thata stick might change into a serpent, and of the resurrection of thedead and other things. We must occupy ourselves with this questionin order to be able to assert the existence of miracles and for stillanother reason, namely to give effective support to the doctrine onwhich the Muslims base their belief that God can do anything. Andlet us now fulfill our intention.The ancient philosophers did not discuss the problem of miracles,since according to them such things must not be examined andquestioned; for they are the principles of the religions, and the manwho inquires into them and doubts them merits punishment, like theman who examines the other general religious principles, such aswhether God exists or blessedness or the virtues. For the existenceof all these cannot be doubted, and the mode of their existence issomething divine which human apprehension cannot attain. Thereason for this is that these are the principles of the acts throughwhich man becomes virtuous, and that one can only attain knowledgeafter the attainment of virtue. One must not investigate the principleswhich cause virtue before the attainment of virtue, and since thetheoretical sciences can only be perfected through assumptions andaxioms which the learner accepts in the first place, this must be stillmore the case with the practical sciences.As to what Ghazali relates of the causes of this as they areaccording to the philosophers, I do not know anyone who asserts thisbut Avicenna. And if such facts are verified and it is possible that abody could be changed qualitatively through something which isneither a body nor a bodily potency, then the reasons he mentionsfor this are possible; but not everything which in its nature is possiblecan be done by man, for what is possible to man is well known. Mostthings which are possible in themselves are impossible for man, andwhat is true of the prophet, that he can interrupt the ordinary courseof nature, is impossible for man, but possible in itself; and because ofthis one need not assume that things logically impossible are possiblefor the prophets, and if you observe those miracles whose existence

Primary Sources • 263is confirmed, you will find that they are of this kind. The clearestof miracles is the Venerable Book of Allah, the existence of whichis not an interruption of the course of nature assumed by tradition,like the changing of a rod into a serpent, but its miraculous natureis established by way of perception and consideration for every manwho has been or who will be till the day of resurrection. And so thismiracle is far superior to all others.Let this suffice for the man who is not satisfied with passing thisprob lem over in silence, and may he understand that the argumenton which the learned base their belief in the prophets is another, towhich Ghazali himself has drawn attention in another place, namelythe act which pro ceeds from that quality through which the prophetis called prophet, that is the act of making known the mysteriousand establishing religious laws which are in accordance with thetruth and which bring about acts that will determine the happinessof the totality of mankind. I do not know anyone but Avicennawho has held the theory about dreams Ghazali mentions. Theancient philosophers assert about revelation and dreams only thatthey proceed from God through the intermediation of a spiritualincorpo real being which is according to them the bestower of thehuman intellect, and which is called by the best authors the activeintellect and in the Holy Law angel.z

Annotated BibliographyAhmad, S. Maqbul. 1981. “Al-Masudi.” In Dictionary of Scientific Biography(hereafter cited as DSB), 9: 171–172.—. 1991. “Djughrafiya.” In Encyclopaedia of Islam (hereafter cited as EI),3: 575–587.—. 1997. “Kharita.” EI, 4: 1077–1083.Aristotle. 1984. The Complete Works of Aristotle. The Revised OxfordTranslation. Jonathan Barnes, ed. 2 vols. Princeton, NJ: PrincetonUniversity Press.Arnaldez, Roger. Averroes: A Rationalist in Islam. Translated from theFrench original, Averroès, un rationaliste en Islam, first publishedby Éditions Balland, Paris, 1998, by David Streight. Notre Dame:University of Notre Dame Press. An insightful short book of 156pages on the thought of Ibn Rushd by a member of the AcadémieFrançaise and professor emeritus at the Sorbonne.Al-Attas, Syed Muhammad Naquib. 1981. The Positive Aspects ofTasawwuf: Preliminary Thoughts on an Islamic Philosophy of Science.Kuala Lumpur: Islamic Academy of Science. This short book by acontemporary Muslim scholar outlines the foundational principles ofscience from an Islamic perspective.—. 1989. Islam and the Philosophy of Science. Kuala Lumpur: InternationalInstitute of Islamic Thought and Civilization.

266 • The Making of Islamic ScienceAzami, M. M. 1978. Studies in Early Hadith Literature. Indianapolis:American Trust Publications. A pioneering work on the evaluationof the smaller collections of Hadith antedating the six canonicalcollections, based on a Ph.D. thesis that has been called by Professor A.J. Arberry “the most exciting and original investigations in this field.”—. 2003. The History of the QurāĀnic Text: From Revelation to Compilation.Leicester: UK Islamic Academy. A remarkable work, one of the bestworks in English, on the history of the QurāĀnic text. It begins witha brief history of Islam and then details the coming into existenceof the QurāĀn—from its revelation to its compilation in the formof a book. Based on the early original sources, this work providesnumerous insights into the procedures through which the text of theQurāĀn was preserved.Bacon, Francis. 1905. The Philosophical Works of Francis Bacon. John M.Robertson, ed. London: Routledge.Baljon, J. M. S. 1961. Modern Muslim Koran Interpretation, 1880-1960.Leiden: Brill.Banu Musa. ca. 9 th century, Kitab al-Hiyal. Translated in 1979 by DonaldHill as The Book of Ingenious Devices. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. Thistranslation provides an opportunity to understand some of thelesser-known aspects of Islamic scientific tradition dealing withtechnological devices used by Muslims before the emergence ofmodern technology.Barbour, Ian. 2000. When Science Meets Religion. San Francisco:HarperSanFrancisco. An important work in the contemporaryreligion and science discourse. Barbour’s view of science and religionis, however, totally based on his particular Christian understandingof the issues. As such, his schema is applicable to a small segment ofthe science and religion discourse.—. 2002. “Response: Ian Barbour on Typologies.” Zygon, 37: 345–359.Berggren. J. L. 1986. Episodes in the Mathematics of Medieval Islam. NewYork: Springer-Verlag. A major contribution to our understanding ofthe history of mathematics, with 97 figures and 20 plates.—. 1996. “Islamic Acquisition of the Foreign Sciences: A CulturalPerspective.” In Jamil Ragep and Sally Ragep, eds., Tradition,

Annotated Bibliography • 267Transmission, Transformation. Leiden: Brill, pp. 263–283. This is arevised version of an earlier paper, which appeared in The AmericanJournal of Islamic Social Sciences (AJISS), 1992; 9(3): 310–324.Al-Biruni, Abu Rayhan. Tr. 1879. Al Athar al Baqiya. Translated byEdward Sachau as The Chronology of Ancient Nations. London: W. H.Allen and Co.—. Tr. 1967. Kitab Tahdid Nihâyât al-Amakin Litashih Masafat al-Masakin.Translated by Jamil Ali as The Determination of the Coordinates ofPositions for the Correction of Distances between Cities. Beirut: TheAmerican University of Beirut. This translation of one of the mostimportant eleventh-century works on geography also providesinsights into the nature of Islamic scientific tradition.—. Tr. 2001–2006. Al-As’ilah wa’l Ajwibah. Translated by Rafik Berjakand Muzaffar Iqbal as Ibn Sina–al-Biruni Correspondence. In Islamand Science, Vols. 1–4. This is the translation of the correspondencebetween Ibn Sina and al-Biruni from the original Arabic text, editedwith English and Persian introductions by Seyyed Hossein Nasr andMehdi Mohaghegh. Kuala Lumpur: International Institute of IslamicThought and Civilization, 1995.—. Tr. 1976. Afrad’l Maqal fi amr al-zilal. Translated with commentary byE. S. Kennedy as The Exhaustive Treatise on Shadows. 2 vols. Aleppo:Institute for the History of Arabic Science. This is an exhaustivediscussion of shadows, their nature, properties, and utilities. Thework deals with optics, mathematics, astronomy, religion, etymology,and literature. It has direct relevance to the determination of prayertimes.Bucaille, Maurice. 1976. La Bible, le Coran et la science: les Écritures saintesexaminées à la lumière des connaissances modernes. Paris: Seghers.Translated into English by Alastair D. Pannell and the author asThe Bible, the QurāĀn and Science: The Holy Scriptures Examined inthe Light of Modern Knowledge. Indianapolis: North American TrustPublications, 1978. This is the most popular book on Islam andscience in the Muslim world. It has been translated into every majorIslamic language and millions of copies have sold. It inaugurated awhole branch of facile writings on Islam and science which attemptsto read modern science into the QurāĀn and Sunnah.

268 • The Making of Islamic ScienceCampbell, William. 1986. The QurāĀn and the Bible In The Light of Historyand Science. Upper Darby, PA: Middle East Resources. A response toMaurice Bucaille’s book, The Bible, the QurāĀn and Science: The HolyScriptures Examined in the Light of Modern Knowledge.Cantor, Geoffery and Kenny, Chris. 2001. “Barbour’s Fourfold Way:Problems with His Taxonomy of Science-Religion Relationships.”Zygon,36: 765–781.Chabas, Josi, Goldstein, B. R., and Chabaas, Jose. 2004. The AlfonsineTables of Toledo. Dordrecht: Springer.Chabás, José and Goldstein, Bernard R. 2003. The Alfonsine Tables ofToledo. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.Chittick, William C. 1989. The Sufi Path of Knowledge. Albany: StateUniversity of New York Press. A ground-breaking work on Ibn al-Arabi. Chittick’s book is a significant contemporary contribution toIslamic mysticism.—. 1998. The Self-Disclosure of God: Principles of Ibn al-‘Arabi’s Cosmology.Albany: State University of New York Press. This book deals with Ibnal-Arabi’s cosmology. It provides insights into later Islamic mysticismand reformulation of philosophical cosmologies.Cohen, Floris H. 1994. The Scientific Revolution: A Historical Inquiry.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Craig, William Lane. 1979. The Kalam Cosmological Argument. New York:The Macmillan Press Ltd. One of the best descriptions of the Kalamcosmological argument, in two parts. The first part deals with thethought of al-Kindi, Saadia, and al-Ghazali; the second with moderndefence of the Kalam cosmological argument. The book includestwo appendices, which describe (i) the relationship between theKalam cosmological argument and (ii) Zeno’s paradox, and Kalamcosmological argument and the thesis of Kant’s first antinomy.Ceylan, Yasin. 1996. Theology and Tafsir in the Major Works of Fakhr al-Dinal-Razi. Kuala Lumpur: International Institute of Islamic Thought.Daniel, Norman. 1960, reprint. 2000. Islam and the West: The Making ofan Image. Oxford: Oneworld. A pioneering work on the making ofimage of Islam in the West.

Annotated Bibliography • 269Dante, Alighieri. 1971. The Divine Comedy, Inferno. Translated by MarkMusa. New York: Penguin.Davidson, Herbert A. 1987. Proofs for Eternity, Creation and the Existenceof God in Medieval Islamic and Jewish Philosophy. Los Angeles: OxfordUniversity Press. One of the most exhaustive studies on the issueof eternity and creation, providing insights into the making of thedebate during the Middle Ages. Davidson provides a comprehensivesurvey of the views of major Muslim and Jewish philosophers alongwith the history of the debate.Dembski, William, ed. 1998. Mere Creation. Downers Grove: InterVarsityPress.Al-Dhahabi, Muhammad Husayn. 1985. al-Tafsir wa’l-Mufassirun, 2vols, 4th ed. Cairo: Maktabat al-Wahba. A useful survey of Tafsirliterature. Al-Dhahabi was one of the first scholars to includescientific tafsir in his survey.Dhanani, Alnoor. 1994. The Physical Theory of Kalam. Leiden: Brill.—. 1996. “Kalam Atoms and Epicurean Minimal Parts.” In Jamil F.Ragep and Sally P. Ragep, eds. Tradition, Transmission, Transformation.Leiden: Brill, pp. 157–171.Dictionary of Scientific Biography (cited as DSB 1980). 1970–1980. CharlesC. Gillispie, ed. 16 vols. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. A majorreference work and one of the few contemporary sources whereinMuslim scientists are placed in the general history of science.Dizer, Muammar. 2001. “Observatories and Astronomical Instruments.”In A. Y. Al-Hassan, ed., The Different Aspects of Islamic Culture. Vol4: Science and Technology in Islam. Part 1: The Exact Sciences.Paris: UNESCO Publishing, pp. 235–265. A compilation of articlesby major scholars in the history of science, this is a good secondarywork on specific aspects of Islamic science.The Encyclopedia of Religion and Nature. 2005. Bron R. Taylor, ed. 2 vols.New York: Thoemmes Continuum.Encyclopedia of Islam (New Edition). 1997. 11 vols. Leiden: Brill. Thiscrown in the jewel of Orientalism remains the most used referencework in Islamic studies. Most of the articles are written by orientalists

270 • The Making of Islamic Scienceand lack authenticity from the point of view of Muslims.Al-Faruqi, Ismail, R. 1982. Islamization of Knowledge: General Principlesand Work Plan. Washington DC: International Institute of IslamicThought. This book has been republished in a revised and enlargededition by a group of scholars associated with the InternationalInstitute of Islamic Thought. The Institute also publishes a quarterly,Journal of Islamic Social Sciences.Feingold, Mordechai. 1996. “Decline and Fall: Arabic Science inSeventeenth Century England.” In Ragep and Ragep eds., Tradition,Transmission, Transformation. Leiden: Brill, pp. 441–469.Al-Ghazali, Abu Hamid. Tr. 2000. Tahafut al-falasifa. Translated byMichael E. Marmura as The Incoherence of the Philosophers. Provo:Brigham Young University Press. One of the most important worksof al-Ghazali, which is frequently erroneously regarded as the bookthat destroyed science in Islamic civilization. This translation by awell-known Ghazali scholar provides a useful parallel English-Arabictext and annotation.Goldberg, Hillel. 2000. “Genesis, Cosmology and Evolution” in JewishAction, 5769: 2.Goldziher, Ignaz. 1916. “Stellung der alten islamischen Orthodoxie zuden antiken Wissenschaften,” Abhandl. Der Preuss. Akad. D. Wiss.(Philos.-hist. Kl.) 8: 3–46; English translation as “The Attitude ofOrthodox Islam Toward the ‘Ancient Sciences’” in Merlin L. Swartz,ed., 1981. Studies on Islam. New York: Oxford University Press, pp.185–215. A pioneering but biased study on the relationship betweenIslam and natural sciences that has influenced the course ofscholarship on Islam and science for almost a century.Grant, Edward. 2004. Science and Religion, 400 B.C. to A.D. 1550: FromAristotle to Copernicus. Westport: Greenwood Press. A general surveyof interaction of science and Christianity, with a small sectiondevoted to Islam.Greaves, Richard L. 1969. The Puritan Revolution and EducationalThought. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Guénon, René. The Crisis of the Modern World. 1942. London: Luzac &Co. This is the English translation by Arthur Osborne of Guénon’s

Annotated Bibliography • 271French work, La crise du monde moderne. Guénon pioneeredtraditional studies in modern times. His work has influenceddiscourse on Islam and science in foundational ways.Gutas, Dimtri. 1998. Greek Thought, Arabic Culture: Graeco-ArabicTranslation Movement in Baghdad and Early Abbasid Society. London:Routledge. This detailed and well-referenced study of the Graeco-Arabic translation movement brings into full relief a large amountof research on the subject. Its extensive references to original sourcesprovide valuable information about the patrons and translatorswho sustained this movement for almost three centuries. It analyzesvarious theories that have been proposed to explain this movementwith scholarly vigor and rejects some of the most commonly citedreasons for the emergence of this movement. With all its academicstrength, the work remains deeply entrenched in orientalism andviews Islam and science nexus from that perspective.Gutas, Dimtri. 2003. “Islam and Science: A False Statement of theProblem.” Islam & Science, 1(2): 215–220.Hall, Robert. “Mechanics.” In A. Y. Al-Hassan, ed., The Different Aspects ofIslamic Culture. Vol. 4: Science and Technology in Islam. Part 1: TheExact Sciences. Paris: UNESCO Publishing, pp. 297–336.Al-Hamavi, Yaqut. Tr. 1959. Al-Mua‘ jam al-Buldan. The introductorychapter, translated by Wadie Jwaideh as The Introductory Chapters ofYaqut’s Mu‘ jam al-buldan. Leiden: Brill.Haq, Nomanul Syed. 1994. Names, Nature and Things. Dordrecht: KluwerAcademic Publishers. Based on a doctoral thesis, this book is a majorcontribution to our understanding of the work of Jabbir bin Hayyan,one of the most important scientists in the history of science.Haq, Nomanul S. 2001. “Islam.” In Dale Jamieson, ed., A Companion toEnvironmental Philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, pp. 111–129.Heisenberg, Werner. 1958. Physics and Philosophy: The Revolution inModern Science. New York: Prometheus Books.Hodgson, Marshall. 1974. The Venture of Islam. Chicago: University ofChicago Press. A major study on Islamic civilization.Huff, Toby E. 1993. The Rise of Early Modern Science: Islam, China and

272 • The Making of Islamic Sciencethe West. Cambridge: University of Cambridge. An often-quoted workwhich attempts to show that there is something inherently wrongwith Islam, and that therefore it could not have produced science. Atypical orientalist approach which attempts to deconstruct Islam andits tradition of learning.Ibn Kathir. reprint 1998. Tafsir ul-QurāĀn al-‘Azim, Sami b. Muhammadas-Salamah, ed. 8 vols. Riyad: Dar Tayyibah. This is one of the majorcommentaries of the QurāĀn, written in the fourteenth century, andstill widely used.Al-Kindi, Ya‘qub ibn Ishaq. On First Philosophy (fi al-Falsafah al-Ula).Translated by Alfred L. Ivry, Albany: State University of New YorkPress. This book provides a good insight into al-Kindi’s philosophythrough a representative work.Jansen, J. J. G. 1974. The Interpretation of the Koran in Modern Egypt.Leiden: Brill. A general survey of QurāĀn scholarship in Egypt.Mardin, Serif. 2000. The Genesis of Young Ottoman Thought: A Study in theModernization of Turkish Political Ideas. Syracuse: Syracuse UniversityPress.Ibn al-Nadim. Tr. 1970. Al-Fihrist. Translated by Bayard Dodge as TheFihrist. Cambridge: Columbia University Press. One of the bestsources of information on a wide range of subjects, Ibn NadimFihrist remains a major reference work on various aspects of Islamictradition of learning—from authors to biographies to subject areas.Ibn Rushd, Abu al-Waleed Muhammad. Tr. 1954. Tahafut al-Tahafut(The Incoherence of the Incoherence). Translated from the Arabic withIntroduction and Notes by Simon van den Bergh, 2 vols. London:Luzac. A key work for Islam and science discourse, Ibn Rushd hererefutes al-Ghazali’s major work, The Incoherence of Philosophers.Ibn Rushd, Abu al-Waleed. 1959. Kitab fasl al-maqal, Arabic text, editedby George F. Hourani. Leiden: Brill. Often cited as a proof of Islam’ssupposed antagonistic attitude toward natural sciences in secondaryworks, this important book by Ibn Rushd is actually concernedwith investigating “parentage” (ittisal) between Islamic religious law(shariah) and wisdom.Ibn Sina. Tr. 1930. The Canon of Medicine. A treatise on the Canon of

Annotated Bibliography • 273medicine of Avicenna, incorporating a translation of the first book, by O.Cameron Gruner. London: Luzac. This is major eleventh century workremained the standard textbook for teaching medicine both in theMuslim world and in Europe for several centuries.Ibn Sina. Tr. 1974. The Life of Ibn Sina. A critical edition and annotatedtranslation by William E. Gohlman. Albany: State University of NewYork Press.Ibn Sina, al-Biruni. 2003. al-As’ilah wa’l-Ajwibah. Translated by RafikBerjak and Muzaffar Iqbal, Islam & Science, 1(1–2): 91–98, 253–260.Inalcik, Halil and Quataert, Donald, eds., 1994. An Economic andSocial History of the Ottoman Empire. 2 vols. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.Inati, Shams. 1996. “Ibn Sina.” In History of Islamic Philosophy. SeyyedHossein Nasr and Oliver Leaman, eds. London: Routledge, pp. 231-246.Iqbal, Muzaffar. 2002. Islam and Science. Aldershot: Ashgate.Al-Iskandarani, Muhammad b. Ahmad. 1880. Kashf al-Asrar ‘an al-Nuraniyya al-QurāĀniyya fą-ma yataallaqu bi’l-Ajram as-Samawiyya wa’l-Ardiyya wa’l-Čaywanat wa’l-Nabat wa’l-Jawahir al-Madaniyya, 3 vols.Cairo: Maktabat al-Wahba. The first complete scientific commentaryon the QurāĀn, this work inaugurated a new branch in the centuriesoldtradition of tafsir (commentary). It attempts to show manydiscoveries of modern science in the QurāĀn.—. 1300/1883. Tibyan al-Asrar al-Rabbaniyya fi’l-Nabat wa’l Ma‘din wa’l-Khawass al-Haywaniyya (The Demonstration of Divine Secrets in theVegetation and Minerals and in the Characteristics of Animals). Damascus:n. p.,. The word tibyan (explanation) in the title is taken from Q.16:89: And We have sent down to thee the Book, explaining all things—aguide, a mercy and glad tidings for Muslims. A work that attempts toshow that many facts and theories of modern science are already inthe QurāĀn.Izutsu, Toshihiko. 1964. God and Man in the Koran: Semantics of theQurāĀnic Weltanschauung. Tokyo: The Keio Institute of Cultural andLinguistic Studies, reprinted 2002 as God and Man in the QurāĀn:Semantics of the QurāĀnic Weltanschauung. Kuala Lumpur: Islamic

274 • The Making of Islamic ScienceBook Trust. An important work on the semantics of the QurāĀn bya Japanese scholar of Islam that examines the semantic structure ofthe QurāĀn and the mutual relationship of its essential themes. Allreferences in the text are to the 2002 edition.al-Jawziyya, Ibn Qayyim. Tr. 1998. Medicine of the Prophet. Translatedby Penelope Johnstone. Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society. Awell-produced translation of the classical work of Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (1292–1350), al-Tibb al-Nabawi. The book contains a useful“Introduction” by the translator, outlining the theoretical foundationof the Prophetic medicine and brief notes on prominent Muslimphysicians.Al-Jazzari, Abu’l Izz ibn al-Razzaz. Tr. 1974. The Book of Knowledgeof Ingenious Mechanical Devices. Translated by Donald R. Hill.Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Kalin, Ibrahim. 2001. “The Sacred Versus the Secular: Nasr on Science.”In Lewis Edwin Hahn, Randall E. Auxier, and Lucian W. Stone, Jr.,eds., The Philosophy of Seyyed Hossein Nasr. Peru, Ill: Open Court, pp.445–462.—. 2002. “Three Views of Science in the Islamic World.” In Ted Peters,Muzaffar Iqbal, and Syed Nomanul Haq, eds., God, Life, and theCosmos. Aldershot: Ashgate, pp. 47–76.Kamali, Mohammad Hashim. 2005. A Textbook of Hadith Studies.Leicestershire: Islamic Foundation. An introductory book onHadith. Includes Hadith criticism, classification, compilation, andauthenticity. This book provides a wide-ranging coverage of Hadithmethodology and literature for introductory and intermediate levels.Keddie. Nikki, R. 1968. An Islamic Response to Imperialism. Berkeley:University of California Press. A good source on the life and times ofJamal al-Din al-Afghani.—. 1972. Sayyid Jamal ad-Din al-Afghani: A Political Biography. Berkeley:University of California.Kennedy, E. S. 1960. The Planetary Equatorium of Jamshid Ghiyath al-Dinal-Kashi. An annotated translation and commentary on the constructionand use of two astronomical computing instruments invented by the fifteenthcentury Iranian scientist, Jamshid ibn Masud ibn Mahmud, Ghiyath al-

Annotated Bibliography • 275Din al-Kashi (d. 1429). Princeton: Princeton University Press. Thisshort book provides insights into the natural of Islamic science in thefifteenth century; it helped in the re-examination of the question ofdecline of science in Islamic civilization and actually pushed the dateof the so-called decline to a period after the fifteenth century.—. (1967). “The Lunar Visibility Theory of Yaqub ibn ďariq.” Journal ofNear Eastern Studies, 27: 126–132.Kennedy, E. S. et al. Studies in the Islamic Exact Sciences. Beirut: AmericanUniversity of Beirut.—. 1980. “Al-Biruni.” DSB, 1: 147–158.Khan, Sayyid Ahmad. 1961. Musafran-e London. Lahore: Majlis Taraqi-eAdab.—. 1963. Maqalat-e Sir Sayyid. Maulana Muhammad Ismail Panipati,eds. 16 vols. Lahore: Majlis-e Taraqqi-e Adad.King, David. 1999. World-Maps for Finding the Direction and Distanceto Mecca. Leiden: Brill. The book describes two newly-discoveredinstruments of the seventeenth century that were used to determinedirection and distance to Makkah. In addition, it provides acomprehensive survey of literature on the subject.King, David. 2004. In Synchrony with the Heavens: Studies in AstronomicalTimekeeping and Instrumentation in Medieval Islamic Civilization. 2 vols.Leiden: Brill. A monumental work of approximately 2000 pages,based on a large number of sources that have not previously beenstudied.Al-Khwarazmi, Abu Ja‘far Muhammad b. Musa. Reprint. 1989. Kitab al-Mukhtasar fi’l-hisab al-jabr wa’l muqablah. Islamabad: Hijrah Council.This book inaugurated the science of Algebra. Al-Khwarazmi’streatise is now of historical significance, but as such it remains animportant document.Kraus, Paul. 1991. “Djabir b. Hayyan” EI, 2: 257–359.Lamoureux, Denis O., Phillip E. Johnson, et al. 1999. DarwinismDefeated? Vancouver: Regent College Publishing.Lemay, Richard. 1981. “Gerard of Cremona.” DSB, 5: 173–192.

276 • The Making of Islamic ScienceLewis, Bernard. 1961. The Emergence of Modern Turkey. London: OxfordUniversity Press.Lindberg, David C. 1992. The Beginnings of Western Science. Chicago: TheUniversity of Chicago Press.Lings, Martin. 1980. Ancient Beliefs and Modern Superstitions. London:Perennial Books. An examination of modernity from the traditionalperspective.Lings, Martin. 1988. The Eleventh Hour. Cambridge: Archetype. Thebook has an important section on the theory of evolution.McVaugh, Michael. 1981. “Constantine the African.” DSB, 3: 393–395.Makdisi, George. 1991. Religion, Law and Learning in Classical Islam.Aldershot: Variorum. A pioneering work which has facilitated abetter understanding of the institutions of learning in Islam.Malik, Hafeez. 1980. Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan and Muslim Modernism inIndia and Pakistan. New York: Columbia University Press.Mohammad, A. H. Helmy. 2000. “Notes on the Reception of Darwinismin Some Islamic Countries.” In E. Ihsanoğlu and F. Günergun, eds.,Science in Islamic Civilization. Istanbul: IRCICA, pp. 245–255.Moosa, Ebrahim. 2002. “Interface of Science and Jurisprudence:Dissonant Gazes at the Body in Modern Muslim Ethics.” In TedPeters, Muzaffar Iqbal, and Syed Nomanul Haq, eds., God, Life, andthe Cosmos. Aldershot: Ashgate.Moore, Keith L. 1982. The Developing Human: With Islamic Additions.Jeddah: Commission for Scientific Miracles of QurāĀn and Sunnah.A popular work which attempts to show a relationship betweenthe QurāĀnic description of the development of fetus and currentscientific understanding.—. 1993. QurāĀn and Modern Science: Correlation Studies. Jeddah: IslamicAcademy for Scientific Research, Jeddah.Nasr, Seyyed Hossein. 1968. Science and Civilization in Islam. Cambridge:Harvard University Press. One of the first well-researched books inmodern times on science and Islamic civilization. The book was apioneering effort in showing various internal connections betweenIslam and its scientific tradition. It also presented a large amount of

Annotated Bibliography • 277new information on Muslim scientists and their works to the generalreadership.—. 1981. Islamic Life and Thought. Albany: State University of New YorkPress.—. 1993. An Introduction to Islamic Cosmological Doctrines, rev. ed. Albany:State University of New York Press. One of the first comprehensiveaccounts of Islamic philosophical cosmologies written in moderntimes. The book contains chapters on cosmological doctrines of IbnSina, Ikhwan al-Safa, and al-Biruni.—. 1993. The Need for a Sacred Science. Albany: State University of NewYork Press.—. 1996. Religion and the Order of Nature. New York: Oxford UniversityPress. A highly well documented account of views of the variousreligious traditions about nature. Based on his 1994 CadburyLectures at the University of Birmingham, the book presents a widespectrum of beliefs regarding the order of nature.—. 1997. Sadr al-Din Shirazi and his Transcendent Theosophy. Tehran:Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies. A short, but useful,work on Mulla Sadra containing background to his contribution toIslamic philosophy, a short biography, and description of his works.—. 2001a. “Cosmology.” In A. Y. al-Hassan, ed., Different Aspects of IslamicCulture. 2 parts. Paris: UNESCO Publishing.—. 2001b. “An Intellectual Biography.” In Lewis Edwin Hahn, Randall E.Auxier, and Lucian W. Stone, Jr., eds., The Philosophy of Seyyed HosseinNasr. Peru, Ill: Open Court.—. 2001c. “Reply to Ibrahim Kalin.” In Lewis Edwin Hahn, Randall E.Auxier, and Lucian W. Stone, Jr., eds., The Philosophy of Seyyed HosseinNasr. Peru, Ill: Open Court, pp. 463–468.Northbourne, Lord. 1983. Looking Back on Progress. Lahore: SuhailAcademy.Nursi, Badiuzzaman. 1998. The Words: On the Nature of Man, Life andAll Things. Istanbul: Sozler Publications. A collection of articles andspeeches by Said Nursi.Olson, Richard G. 2004. Science and Religion, 1450-1900. From Copernicus

278 • The Making of Islamic Scienceto Darwin. Westport: Greenwood Press. Part of the GreenwoodGuides to Science and Religion, this book outlines the nature of theinteraction between science and Christianity between 1450 and 1900.Owen, Roger. 2004. Lord Cromer: Victorian Imperialist, EdwardianProconsul. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. The firstbiography of the British de facto ruler of Egypt from 1883 to 1907.Pagel, Walter. 1977. “Medical Humanism: A Historical Necessity in theEra of the Renaissance.” In Francis Maddison, Margaret Pelling, andCharles Webster, eds. Linacre Studies: Essays on the Life and Works ofThomas Linacre c. 1460-1525. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 375–386.Panipati, Shaikh Muhammad Ismail. ed., 1993. Letters to and fromSir Syed Ahmad Khan. Lahore: Majlis Taraqi-e Adab, Board forAdvancement of Literature. These letters are an important sourcefor understanding the worldview of Indian reformer, Sayyid AhmadKhan who wrote a partial commentary of the QurāĀn in which heattempted to show a relationship between modern science and theQurāĀn.Perry, Whitall N., 1995. The Widening Breach: Evolutionism in the Mirrorof Cosmology. Barlow: Quinta Essentia. A traditional critique of thetheory of evolution, this is by far the best work which examines thetheory of evolution from the perspective of cosmology.Pines, Shlomo. 1986. “What was original in Arabic science.” In Studiesin Arabic Versions of Greek Texts and in Medieval Science. Jerusalem:Magnes, the Hebrew University, p. 193.Pingree, David. 1970. “The Fragments of the Works of al-Fazari.” Journalof Near Eastern Studies. 29: 103–123.Pratt, Lattin. 1961. The Letters of Gilbert with His Papal Privileges asSylvester II. Translated with an Introduction. New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press.Q. Al-QurāĀn. Muslims consider the QurāĀn to be the actual speechof God and hence untranslatable; only the meanings of the versescan be communicated in another language. Most “translations,”therefore, are renderings of the Arabic text. In quoting the verses ofthe QurāĀn, the first number refers to the surah (chapter), the secondto the âya (verse).

Annotated Bibliography • 279Rashed, Roshdi. 1994. The Development of Arabic Mathematics: BetweenArithmetic and Algebra. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Thisis the English translation by A. F. W. Armstrong of Rashed’s 1984work on mathematical sciences in Islam, Entre Arithmétique et Algèbre.Recherches sur l’Histoire des Mathèmatiques Arabes. Paris: Sociétéd’Eition Les Belles Lettres.Ratzsch, Del. 2000. Science & Its Limits. Downers Grove: InterVarsityPress. A book written from a Christian perspective that aspires todefine science and its limits: what it can and cannot tell us.Roberts, Victor. 1966. “The Planetary Theory of Ibn al-Shatir.” Isis, 57:210.Sabra, A. and Shehaby, N. 1971. Ibn al-Haytham al-Shukuk Ala Batlamyus(Dubitationes in Ptolemaeum). Cairo: National Library Press.Sabra, A. I. 1987. “The Appropriation and Subsequent Naturalization ofGreek Science in Medieval Islam: A Preliminary Statement.” History ofScience, 25: 223–243; reprinted with other papers in a collection, Optics,Astronomy and Logic: Studies in Arabic Science and Philosophy. 1994.—. 1994. Optics, Astronomy and Logic: Studies in Arabic Science andPhilosophy. Aldershot: Variorum.Sabzavari, Haji Mulla Hadi. Tr. 1977. The Metaphysics of Sabzavari.Translated by Mehdi Mohaghegh and Izutsu Toshihiko. New York:Caravan Books. This work is a complete translation of the Metaphysicsof Sabzavari’s Ghurar al-farâ‘d, a systematic exposition of traditionalIslamic philosophy comprising logic, physics, theology, andmetaphysics, commonly known as Sharh-I manzumah (Commentary ona Philosophical Poem). This is the most popular textbook that has beenused in Iran, and that is still in current use, to teach philosophy inalmost all religious schools.Saliba, George. 1994. A History of Arabic Astronomy. New York: New YorkUniversity Press. A collection of articles, written over a period of twodecades, devoted to the study of the various aspects of non-Ptolemaicastronomy in medieval Islam. Based on primary sources, thesearticles provide insights into the making of the Islamic astronomicaltradition between the eleventh and the fifteenth centuries. Amongother things, the book provides substantial evidence against the

280 • The Making of Islamic Sciencecommonly held belief that Islamic scientific tradition declinedas early as the twelfth century. The author shows that some of thetechniques and mathematical theorems developed during this periodwere identical to those employed by Copernicus in developing hisown non-Ptolemaic astronomy.—. 2007. Islamic Science and the Making of the European Renaissance.Cambridge: The MIT Press. See review of this book in Islam &Science, Vol. 7 (Summer 2009) No. 1.Samsó, Julio. 2001. “Astronomical Tables and Theory.” In A. Y. Al-Hassan, ed., The Different Aspects of Islamic Culture. Vol. 4: Science andTechnology in Islam. Part 1: The Exact Sciences. Paris: UNESCO,pp. 209–234.Sardar, Ziauddin. ed., 1984. The Touch of Midas: Science, Values andthe Environment in Islam and the West. Manchester: University ofManchester.—. 1985. Islamic Futures. London: Mansell.—. 1989. Explorations in Islamic Science. London: Mansell. Sardar’s ideason Islam and science were presented in this work in more detail thanin his early work. Criticizing modern science from a sociologicalaspect, Sardar developed a new branch of Islam and sciencediscourse using the work of western critics of modern science.Sarton, George. 1927–1947. Introduction to the History of Science. 3 vols.Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins. A major reference work of itstimes, this book brought to attention major achievements of Islamicscientific tradition. It has now become dated, but remains importantfor its historical role.Sarton, George. 1955. Appreciation of Ancient and Medieval Science duringthe Renaissance (1450-1600). New York: Barnes.As-Sawi, Abdul Jawwad. 1992. Proposed Medical Research Projects Derivedfrom the QurāĀn and Sunnah. Jeddah: World Muslim League.Sayili, Aydin. 1960. The Observatory in Islam. Ankara: Turk Tarih KurumuBasimevi. One of the most important works on the subject, providinga systematic account of the observatories in ten chapters. Anappendix contains reflections on the causes of the decline of science

Annotated Bibliography • 281in the Muslim world.Schuon, Frithjof. 1965. Lights on the Ancient Worlds. London: PerennialBooks. This is the English translation by Lord Northbourne ofSchuon’s Regards sur les mondes anciens.Setia, Adi. 2003. “Al-Attas’ Philosophy of Science: An Extended Outline.”Islam & Science, 1(2): 165–214.Sharif, M. M. 1963. A History of Muslim Philosophy. 2 vols. Karachi: RoyalBook Company. A major work on Islamic philosophy, containsbiographical and bibliographic details and life sketches of majorMuslim scholars.Shlomo, Pines. 1986. “What was Original in Arabic Science” in his Studiesin Arabic Versions of Greek Texts and in Mediaeval Science. Leiden: Brill,pp. 181–205.van Steenberghen, Fernand. 1955. Aristotle in the West. Translated byLeonard Johnston. Louvian: Nauwelaerts.Stenberg, Leif. 1996. The Islamization of Science: Four Muslim PositionsDeveloping an Islamic Modernity. Lund: Lund Studies in Historyof Religion. This book presents a systematic account of modernscholarship on Islam and science through developing a four-folddivision of the discourse.Suhrawardi, Shihab al-Din. Tr. 1999. Hikmat al-Ishraq. Translated byJohn Walbridge and Hossein Ziai as The Philosophy of Illumination.Prova: Brigham Young University Press. This is a new critical editionof the text of Suhrawardi’s magnus opus, Hikmat al-Ishraq. Thebi-lingual Arabic-English text is annotated and supplemented bycommentary and notes.As-Suyuti, Jalal al-Din. 1982. al-hay’a as-saniya fi’l hay’a as-sunniya.Translated by Anton M. Heinen. Beirut: Franz Steiner Verlag. Animportant work, this excellent critical edition with translation andcommentary by Anton M. Heinen traces as-Suyuti’s sources, givesbackground information on the cosmological tradition in Islam,comments on the nature of scientific enterprise in early centuries ofIslam, and provides a translation of as-Suyuti’s work along with theoriginal Arabic.

282 • The Making of Islamic ScienceSourdel, D. 1986. “Bayt al-Hikmah.” EI, 1: 1141.Swartz, Merlin L., ed., 1981. Studies on Islam. New York: OxfordUniversity Press.Toomer, G. J. 1996. Eastern Wisedome and Learning, The Study of Arabic inSeventeenth-Century England. Oxford: Clarendon.Trude, Ehlert. 1993. “Muhammad.” EI, 7: 360–387.Ibn Tufail, Abu Bakr Muhammad. The Journey of the Soul, A newtranslation by Riad Kocache. London: Octagon. A short book whichattempted to show that, when left to its own, human reason canarrive at fundamental truths about God and life.Taeschner, Fr. 1991. “The Ottoman Geographers.” EI, 2: 587–590.Watton, William. 1694. Reflections upon Ancient and Modern Learning .London: J. Leake. The full title includes the following lines: Witha dissertation upon the epistles of Phalaris, Themistocles, Socrates,Euripides; &c. Originally printed when Watton was 28, as a reply toSir William Temple’s Ancient and Modern Learning (1692), and as adefense of the kind of scholarship then under attack as pedantry.The primary text deals with various aspects of ancient and modernscience, mathematics, philosophy, and philology.Youschkevitch, A. P. and B. A. Rosenfeld. 1980. “al-Khayami.” DSB, 7:323–334.Ziadat, Adel A. 1986. Western Science in the Arab World, The Impact ofDarwinism, 1860-1930. London: Macmillan. This is a somewhatdated survey of the arrival of Darwinism in a part of the Arab world.Based on original sources, it provides good insights into the makingof the discourse on Darwinism in certain parts of the Arab world.z

IndexAAbbasids xvii, xxiii, xxv, 9-12, 14, 24,25, 38, 79, 85, 129, 144, 149, 267Abduh, Muhammad 160, 168, 175, 182Abu Bakr 1Abulfeda 132Abu Ma’shar xiv, 121Abu Qurra, Theodore 24Adelard of Bath 121Aeneas 130afaq, sing. falq 41Afghanistan 34, 168Afghans 155Ahmad, Hanafi 176Ahmad, Maqul S. 38, 39, 40, 43al-Abhari, Athir al-Din 138al-Afghani, Jamal al-Din 77-79, 160,166-170, 172-75, 182, 185al-Andalus xviii, 18, 37, 127, 128, 130al-Balkhi 39, 40, 43al-Battani 51Al-Biruni 34-36, 51, 56, 62, 72, 81,101, 103, 263al-Bitruji xiv, 54, 124al-Dhahabi, Muhammad Husayn 175Aleppo 133, 263al-Farabi, Abu Nasr 22, 74, 98, 120,122al-Farghani 39, 120, 122al-Faruqi, Ismail 195al-Fazari 9, 11, 39, 58algebra 45, 47, 48, 70, 121, 122al-Ghazali, Abu Hamid 23, 97, 106,107, 112, 138, 142, 144, 173, 252algorithm 45al-Hamavi, Yaqut 41, 44Al-Idrisi xxi, 41Aligarh Muslim University 165al-Iraqi, Fakhr al-din 108al-Isfahani, Abu al-Majid MuhammadRida 183al-Iskandarani Muhammad ibnAhmad 175al-Jahiz xival-Jazari 138al-Juwayni, Abu’l-Ma‘ali Abd al-Malik105al-Juzjani 54al-Kashi, Jamshid Ghiyath al-Din 46,47, 52, 53, 138al-Khazini, Abd al-Rahman 58al-Khwarizmi xiv, 39, 45, 46, 48, 51,

284 • The Making of Islamic Science70, 72, 73, 122, 124, 158al-Kindi, Ya‘qub ibn Ishaq 22, 24, 34,39, 46, 62, 74, 85-87, 122, 231, 232Almagest 56, 122al-Ma’mun 24, 38, 42, 44, 54al-Manar 175al-Mansur 9, 11, 24, 38, 149al-Mashriq 181al-Razi, Abu Bakr Zakaria xix, xxii,14, 58, 59, 61, 86, 100, 106, 107,122, 264al-Razi, Fakhr al-Din xix, xxii, 14, 58,59, 61, 86, 100, 106, 107, 122, 264al-Samawal 47al-Shirazi, Qutb al-Din 54, 57, 108,112, 138al-Tusi, Nasir al-Din xxiii, 54, 56, 108,112, 138al-Uqlidisi 45, 46Anees 199Apollonius 46appropriation 25, 27aql 240Arabic 46, 49, 52, 66, 69, 109, 111,153, 156, 166manuscripts 9, 131science 145, 172studies 131translation movement 120–135translations 12, 13, 18, 21, 24, 32,35, 38, 42, 60, 74, 83, 93, 105,117–135, 140, 147, 168, 180–183,192Arabist 144architecture 16, 152, 205Aristotlebelief in eternity 93classification scheme 21commentators of 86, 124concept of God 22cosmology 93–96influence of 22, 38, 93, 95–107, 232natural philosophy 74physics 58reception of 93refutation of 58transformation of 29, 33, 34, 88translations of his works 25, 122as-Suyuti 90astrolabe xviii, xxi, 53, 56-58, 60, 125astronomy 50, 50–58, 51, 52, 53folk 37Greek 13Islamic 9Latin 124theoretical foundations of 8Atto, the bishop of Vich 118Averroes 79, 82, 84, 85, 252Azzindani, Abdul Majeed A. 190BBacon, Francis 133, 262Baghdad xviii, xix, xxiii, 9, 11, 12, 24,34, 40, 41, 44, 45, 54, 86, 87, 109,112, 142, 149, 154, 231Banu Musa 122Barbour, Ian viiBengal 152Big Bang 192Bologna 126Bombay 168botany xvii, 23, 63, 190, 253Boyle, Robert 67Brahe, Tycho 56Bramah, Joseph 151Bucaille, Maurice 191-93Bucaillism 199Bukhara 97, 243CCaesar 130Cairo 52, 109, 154, 175, 176, 218Calcutta 168

Index • 285caliphate 9-11, 157Canon of Medicine xxi, 98, 121, 123,243Cantor, Geoffery viiiCatching up syndrome 213causality 58, 61, 111, 232, 252China 144, 145Chittick, William C. 108, 110, 111Christianity viii, ix, 67-69, 76, 77, 79,83, 93, 119and science x, 65, 122, 161Cicero 130colonization xi, 77, 135, 152, 153, 155,158, 160, 185, 193Commission for Scientific Miracles ofQurāĀn and Sunnah 189Constantine the African 119Constantinople 156Copernicus 55, 125, 223cosmology 7–12, 29, 32, 36, 89–103,107–111, 146, 177, 190Aristotelian 30, 92, 94Peripatetic 97Sufi 108cotton 252creatio ex nihilo 88, 92creational-Biruni’s view 62, 101Aristotle’s view 21, 95criticized 199Mu‘tazilah and Asha‘irah view 32Qur’anic account 2, 5, 30, 58, 88-92scientific exegeses 177–182versus eternity 103–116Crusades xxxi, 128, 129DDamascus 10, 24, 46, 52, 54, 109, 269Dante Alighieri 130Dar al-Harb 163Darwin, Charles 73, 168, 177-83, 223,274Darwinism 168, 177-82Davidson, Herbert A. 104, 106Delhi xxvi, 108, 156, 164dîn 66, 70Dutch 130, 150EEast India Company 152Eaton, Charles Le Gai 165, 201Egypt 149, 151, 154, 179-81, 213, 216,218, 219Einstein 67, 198, 223Electra 130Empedocles 79essence, mâhiyyah 31, 92, 95, 98, 114,233, 242, 250Euclid 48, 97, 122evolution 73, 178, 180-83, 196, 206-8exegesis 109, 175, 176ex nihilo 32, 101Ffalasifa 121fatwa 82, 163, 214, 216Feingold 131, 132Fez 109fiqh 83Fuchs, Leonhart 134GGalen 14, 133, 246Galileo, Galilei ix, 65, 76, 79, 134, 173Generation and Corruption 240geography 7, 17, 29, 35-38, 41-45, 84,140, 156Balkhi School 40Islamic cartography 17, 37, 43geology 61, 62, 140, 177, 190Gerard of Cremona xxii, 45, 121, 123,243

286 • The Making of Islamic ScienceGerbert of Aurillac 118gnostic 99, 112, 115God 2–6, 21, 37, 66, 67, 80, 95, 99,161, 165, 191, 206–209, 248, 250and causality 252, 258, 259Aristotle’s concept of 21, 22as Creator 4, 30, 87, 91, 95, 103–111,182, 183, 198attributes of 4, 44, 55, 89, 92, 93, 101in Illuminationist philosophy 100as seen by Muslim scientists 43, 46,51, 52, 61, 98, 101, 174–177as seen by mutakallimun 61Tawhid (Oneness of) x, 5, 89–91, 96Goldziher, Ignaz 18, 69, 76, 77, 79, 80,82, 83, 143, 144, 145, 146, 170Goldziherism 81, 144, 146Greaves, John 132, 133Greek philosophy xii, 82, 85, 97Guénon, René 201-3, 204guilds 9Gutas, Dimitri 14, 16, 24, 25, 76, 77HHabash, al-Hasib 51Hadith 1, 80, 108, 128, 190Haeckel, Ernst Heinrich 183Hanafi 163, 176Hanbali 77Haq, Syed Nomanul 4, 5, 33Hassan, Hussein 183Heisenberg, Werner 186, 187hermeneutics 24, 104, 192hikmah 82, 83, 205, 208Hindu 9, 45, 46, 79, 101Hodgson, Marshall G. S. 153, 155Hoodbhoy 86Huff, Toby E. 69, 144-46Hugh of Santalla 120human being xii, 3, 4, 22, 23, 66, 73,103, 177, 212, 216, 217, 224, 225,247, 248humanists 131, 134Hunayn ibn Ishaq 25, 124Husayn bin Ali 10Hussein al-Jisr 182IIbn al-Bitriq 24Ibn al-Haytham 14, 15, 22, 51, 54, 126,134, 158, 223Ibn al-Muqaffa 24Ibn al-Nafis 138Ibn al-Shatir xxiv, 52, 54, 57, 138, 158Ibn Battuta 41Ibn Jubayr 41Ibn Khaldun 23Ibn Khurradadhbih 39, 40Ibn Na‘ima 24Ibn Rushd 22, 32, 54, 74, 80, 82, 83,84-86, 97, 98, 106, 109, 112, 123,124, 130, 144, 247, 252Ibn Sina xiv, 22, 32, 34, 62, 74, 75, 80,86, 88, 97-100, 102, 103, 106, 108,112, 115, 121-24, 130, 158, 236, 237,243, 248Ibn Tufayl xiv, 104, 105Ibn Yunus 52Ibrahim Pasha 156Ijmalis 196-99ijtihad 215, 216Ikhwan al-Safa’ 183ilm 80intellectual sciences 114International Institute of IslamicThought 195Iqbal, Muzaffar 80, 236Isfahan 48, 114, 137, 141, 142, 155Islam and science i, vii-xiii, xxvii, 1, 5,6, 14, 19, 20, 22, 66-69, 71-76, 79,80, 85, 87, 116, 117, 135, 140, 143,148-54, 158-61, 166, 167, 170-77,

Index • 287183-89, 191, 193, 194, 196, 199, 200,205, 208, 213, 218, 219, 221, 231,252, 263, 266-68, 276, 277colonial era 154–158Islam as a justifier of science161–174modern approaches 158, 186–190,219–221nexus 57, 73, 74, 80scienctific tafsir 174–177Islamic art 58Islamic astronomy 9, 13, 52, 53, 54Islamic orthodoxy 76, 81, 140, 142,146Islamic philosophy 59, 82, 112, 113,161, 208Islamic science 14, 16, 18, 19, 26, 77,117, 143, 147, 172, 196, 198, 223-26,228, 229Islamization 86, 195, 196Islamize 88, 195Ismail Mazhar 183Istanbul 56Izutsu 3, 115JJabir bin Aflah 54, 122Jabir bin Hayyan 7, 11, 12, 33, 106Jansen, J. J. G. 175, 268Jawhari, Tantawi 176Jesuits 180John of Seville 120, 121Kkalam 107Kalin, Ibrahim 194, 202, 205, 206Kant, Immanuel 65Katibi 112Kemal, Namik 161, 173Kennedy, E.S. 12, 28, 35, 53, 55Kenny, Chris viiiKepler, Johannes ix, 173, 223Khan, Nadir 155Khan, Sayyid Ahmad 160-66Khawarij 10King, David 17, 139Kitab al-Manazir 22Kitab al-Tawhid 183knowledge, ilm 22, 50, 69, 121, 151Kufa 10, 231Kuhn, Thomas 145Kushyar bin Labban 46LLatin translations 45, 119Lindberg, David 143, 144Lings, Martin 67, 201, 206, 207logic xix, xxxi, 39, 52, 82-84, 97, 100,105, 122, 227, 246, 275MMadinah xxx, xxxii, 7, 8, 10, 14, 37Maimonides 88, 104Makdisi, George 76Makkah xxx, xxxii, 10, 17, 35-37, 40,43, 50, 51, 52, 109, 154, 163, 168Manzoor, Pervez S. 199Maragha 54-56mathematics xviii, 12, 21, 23, 35, 37,45-48, 51, 52, 70, 79, 118, 122, 142,146, 156, 173, 215, 262, 263, 278mawaqeet 17McVaugh, Michael 119medicine xviii, xix, xx, 7, 8, 11, 12,50, 63, 64, 79, 83, 98, 119, 122, 123,134, 138, 156, 190, 215, 243-45, 247,252, 254, 269, 270Prophetic 7Merv 10, 37Metaphysica 93metaphysics 21, 39, 97, 103, 114, 194,200, 206, 208, 246mineralogy 62, 253miracle 257, 259

288 • The Making of Islamic ScienceMir Damad 114missionaries 179mithaq 4modernity xii, 160, 194, 202, 219, 220modern science i, viii-xii, xxvii, xxix,31, 73, 74, 110, 139, 145, 147, 154,159-66, 172, 174, 176, 177, 179, 184,185, 186, 187, 189, 191-209, 214,215, 219, 220, 221, 225-28, 231, 263,269, 274, 276, 278monastery 54, 118, 119, 120Mongol 107, 108, 112, 142, 149, 150,153Moore, Keith 190, 191, 193Moral and Ethical Issues 73biogenetics 198–278fatwas 216Muhammad Ali 154, 155Muhammad, the prophet xxx, 17, 66,77Muir, William 165Musnad of Ahmad 80Mustafa Kemal 157, 158, 173, 183mutakallimun 61Mu‘tazilah 32NNapoleon xxvi, 151, 154Nasr, Seyyed Hossein 2, 5, 35, 43, 93,98-102, 112, 114, 115, 201, 205, 206nature, innate (fitrah) 66, 248work of God 161Necessary Being 99, 115nécheris 168, 169Newton, Isaac 67, 150, 173Novum Organum 133Nursi, Badiuzzeman Said 161, 173, 174OobservatoriesMaragha 54, 56Samarqand 48, 52, 53, 55, 72, 227Olson, Richard 65-68ontology 194, 198optics 60, 122Organization of Islamic Conference160, 217Organon 97orientalism 128, 133orientalists 12, 16, 145Orpheus 130orthodoxy 16, 76, 77, 81, 140, 142, 146Ottoman Empire 132, 154Tulip Age 151Ottomans 42, 131, 151, 152, 155-57Oxford 126, 132, 165PPahlavi 23, 42, 156Paris 78, 124, 126, 130, 170, 185Peripatetic 93, 97, 99, 100, 108, 112,115, 237Perry, Whitall N. 207Philoponus 93, 105Pingree, David 9, 12Plato 38, 94, 130Plato of Tivoli 121Plotinus 33, 34, 93, 94Pope Sylvester II 118Portuguese 42, 150posterior analytics 122precursorism 26Principia 151Prophet of Islam xiii, xxx, 17, 63, 66,69, 80, 89, 128psychology 39, 63Ptolemy 38, 54, 56, 97, 122QQajar 156qiblah xxxii, 36, 37, 39, 42, 43, 50, 51quiddity 114, 115Qum 142QurāĀn xxxii–6, 8, 17, 19, 31, 36, 37,

Index • 28941, 61, 62, 66–69, 89, 91, 93, 109,110, 151, 154, 165, 215account of 31, 61, 88and modern science 174concept of God 22concept of knowledge 20Latin paraphrase 130QurāĀnic cosmology 13, 90–93, 101QurāĀnic cosmos 30QurāĀnic scholars 13QurāĀnic studies 9sciences of xxxii, 89scientific tafsir 174–177tafsir 160translations of 130view of nature 1–5, 16worldview xi, 44, 91RRadiant Cosmography 90Rashed, Roshidi 172reductionism 16, 26religion and science viii, xiii, xxvi, 14,65, 67-69, 73, 77, 80, 87, 110, 262Renaissance 19, 27, 65, 68, 119, 130,131, 147, 203, 225, 274, 276Renan, Ernest xxvi, 77-79, 170-73, 185revelation xxx, 25, 26, 66, 72, 73, 82,200, 201, 208, 259, 262Rida, Rashid 160, 175, 182Risale 174Robert of Chester 45, 121Robert of Ketton 130Roman Empire 120Royal Asiatic Society of London 164ruh 121Rumi, Jalal al-Din 42, 108SSabra, A. I. 14, 26-28, 76, 139Sabsvari, Mulla Hadi 112Safavi 137, 150, 153Safavid xxv, xxvi, 141, 142, 155, 156Saliba, George 8, 12, 13, 54, 55, 275Salim III 152Samarqand xvii, xxiv, xxv, 47, 48, 52,53, 55, 72, 227Sanskrit 9, 38Sardar, Ziauddin 196, 197, 198, 199,276Sarton, George 120, 138, 243, 276Sayili, Aydin 51, 54, 148, 276School of Illumination 93, 100Schoun, Frithjof 201, 202-205, 276,277Schweigger, Solomon 134science and religion i, vii, 67-70, 74,83, 88, 116, 124, 262science of nature 197, 203scientific journals 179, 181scientific miracles of 189–193Scientific Revolution viii, xiii, xxix, 69,74, 117, 136, 143-45, 172, 201, 264scientism 221Shah Wali Allah 108, 153Shirazi, Qutb al-Din xxiv, 54, 57, 108,112, 138Shirazi, Sadr al-Din 108, 109, 112, 273shukuk, literature 14, 54, 275Signs, ayat 3, 30, 44, 101, 103, 111,181, 189, 206, 224, 244, 246Sirhindi, Shaykh Ahmad 108sophia perennis 201Spain xvii, xviii, xxv, 11, 18, 37, 98,107, 112, 118, 119, 121, 124, 127,128, 156Starkey, George 133Stenberg 194, 277Sufis 29-32, 92, 100, 108, 109Sunna 216Swartz 76, 77, 266, 277Syria xvii, xxx, 149, 180, 187Syrian Protestant College 180

290 • The Making of Islamic ScienceTTabataba’i, Sayyid MuhammadHusayn 161tafsir xxvi, 160, 174-76, 265, 269tafsir al-ilmi 160, 175Tawhid x, 5, 6, 67, 89, 96, 169, 183,200teleology 101, 201Thabit ibn Qurra xviii, 122theology xviii, xx, 81, 114, 275Thomas Aquinas 88, 104Timaeus 38Timur xxiv, 48Tipu Sultan 152Toledo xxi, 119, 120, 122-26, 264traditionalists 200, 203, 206Translation Movement 12first phase 118–119second phase 119–126third phase 126–128Transoxania xix, 149Turkey xxvii, 149, 156-58, 161, 174,183, 219, 272two-entity model vii, viii, ix, x, 70, 73Zzakah xxxii, 48Zand, Karim Khan 156Ziadat, Adel A. 182, 278Zij xx, 9, 48, 51, 121zoology xvii, 23, 63, 253Zoroastrians 9UUlugh Beg xxiv, 48, 52-55, 59, 227Umayyads xvii, 10Uthman b. Affan 10Uthman Dan Fodio 152WWajdi, Muhammad Farid 176Watt, James 151Watton, William 133Weber, Max 145William of Moerbeke 124wujûd 110, 111, 114z